Laboratório de Investigações Neuropsicológicas, Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Laboratório de Investigações Neuropsicológicas, Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Belo Horizonte, Brazil ; Faculty of Medicine, School of Psychology and Psychiatry, Monash University Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Front Psychol. 2013 Dec 2;4:899. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00899. eCollection 2013.
The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is the most widely instrument used in the assessment of affective decision-making in several populations with frontal impairment. The standard performance measure on the IGT is obtained by calculating the difference between the advantageous and the disadvantageous choices. This standard score does not allows the assessment of the use of different strategies to deal with contingencies of gain and losses across the task. This study aims to compare the standard score method used in IGT with a method that analyses the patterns of staying and shifting among different decks across the 100 choices, considering contingencies of choices with and without losses. We compared the IGT performance of 24 children with externalizing disorders (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder) and 24 healthy age-matched children. The analyses of the standard score across all blocks failed to show differences among children with externalizing disorders and control children. However, healthy children showed a pattern of shifting more from disadvantageous decks to advantageous decks and choosing more consecutive cards from the advantageous decks across all blocks, independently of the contingency of losses. On the other hand, children with externalizing disorders presented a pattern of shifting more from advantageous decks to disadvantageous ones in comparison to healthy children and repeatedly chose cards from the B deck across all blocks. This findings show that even though differences among groups might not be found when using the standard analyses, a different type of analysis might be able to show distinct strategies on the execution of the test.
爱荷华赌博任务（IGT）是最广泛应用于评估前额叶损伤人群情感决策的工具之一。IGT 的标准绩效衡量标准是通过计算有利和不利选择之间的差异来获得的。这种标准分数并不能评估在整个任务中应对收益和损失的不同策略的使用情况。本研究旨在比较 IGT 中使用的标准分数方法与一种分析在 100 次选择中不同牌组之间停留和转移模式的方法，同时考虑有损失和无损失选择的偶然性。我们比较了 24 名患有外化障碍（注意缺陷多动障碍和对立违抗性障碍）的儿童和 24 名年龄匹配的健康儿童的 IGT 表现。对所有区块的标准分数的分析未能显示外化障碍儿童和对照组儿童之间的差异。然而，健康儿童在所有区块中表现出从不利牌组更多地转移到有利牌组，并更多地从有利牌组中选择连续的牌，而不受损失的偶然性影响。另一方面，与健康儿童相比，患有外化障碍的儿童在所有区块中表现出从有利牌组更多地转移到不利牌组的模式，并且反复选择 B 牌组中的牌。这些发现表明，即使在使用标准分析时可能没有发现组间差异，但不同类型的分析可能能够显示出在执行测试时的不同策略。
