Howlett Jonathon R, Paulus Martin P
Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Laureate Institute for Brain Research, Tulsa, OK, USA.
Front Psychiatry. 2017 May 22;8:88. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00088. eCollection 2017.
Individual differences in decision-making are important in both normal populations and psychiatric conditions. Variability in decision-making could be mediated by different subjective utilities or by other processes. For example, while traditional economic accounts attribute risk aversion to a concave subjective utility curve, in practice other factors could affect risk behavior. This distinction may have important implications for understanding the biological basis of variability in decision-making and for developing interventions to improve decision-making. Another aspect of decision-making that may vary between individuals is the sensitivity of subjective utility to counterfactual outcomes (outcomes that could have occurred, but did not). We investigated decision-making in relation to hedonic capacity and trait anxiety, two traits that relate to psychiatric conditions but also vary in the general population. Subjects performed a decision-making task, in which they chose between low- and high-risk gambles to win 0, 20, or 40 points on each trial. Subjects then rated satisfaction after each outcome on a visual analog scale, indicating subjective utility. Hedonic capacity was positively associated with the subjective utility of winning 20 points but was not associated with the concavity of the subjective utility curve (constructed using the mean subjective utility of winning 0, 20, or 40 points). Consistent with economic theory, concavity of the subjective utility curve was associated with risk aversion. Hedonic capacity was independently associated with risk seeking (i.e., not mediated by the shape of the subjective utility curve), while trait anxiety was unrelated to risk preferences. Contrary to our expectations, counterfactual sensitivity was unrelated to hedonic capacity and trait anxiety. Nevertheless, trait anxiety was associated with a self-report measure of regret-proneness, suggesting that counterfactual influences may occur via a pathway that is separate from immediate counterfactual processing biases. Taken together, our results show that hedonic capacity but not trait anxiety affects risk-taking through a mechanism that appears independent of the shape of the subjective utility curve, while hedonic capacity and trait anxiety do not affect the influence of counterfactual outcomes on subjective utility. The results have implications for understanding the underlying mechanisms of variable decision-making and for developing interventions to improve decision-making.
决策中的个体差异在正常人群和精神疾病状态下都很重要。决策的变异性可能由不同的主观效用或其他过程介导。例如,虽然传统的经济学观点将风险厌恶归因于凹形的主观效用曲线,但在实际中其他因素可能会影响风险行为。这种区分对于理解决策变异性的生物学基础以及开发改善决策的干预措施可能具有重要意义。决策的另一个可能因人而异的方面是主观效用对反事实结果(本可能发生但未发生的结果)的敏感性。我们研究了与享乐能力和特质焦虑相关的决策,这两个特质既与精神疾病有关,在普通人群中也存在差异。受试者执行一项决策任务,在每次试验中,他们要在低风险和高风险赌博之间做出选择,以赢得0、20或40分。然后,受试者在视觉模拟量表上对每个结果后的满意度进行评分,以表明主观效用。享乐能力与赢得20分的主观效用呈正相关,但与主观效用曲线的凹度无关(主观效用曲线是用赢得0、20或40分的平均主观效用构建的)。与经济理论一致,主观效用曲线的凹度与风险厌恶相关。享乐能力与风险寻求独立相关(即不由主观效用曲线的形状介导),而特质焦虑与风险偏好无关。与我们的预期相反,反事实敏感性与享乐能力和特质焦虑无关。然而,特质焦虑与后悔倾向的自我报告测量相关,这表明反事实影响可能通过一条与即时反事实加工偏差不同的途径发生。综合来看,我们的结果表明,享乐能力而非特质焦虑通过一种似乎独立于主观效用曲线形状的机制影响冒险行为,而享乐能力和特质焦虑并不影响反事实结果对主观效用的影响。这些结果对于理解可变决策的潜在机制以及开发改善决策的干预措施具有启示意义。