• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

通过虚拟严重游戏 Kalliste 决策任务对风险和不确定性下的决策进行生态评估。

An ecological assessment of decision-making under risk and ambiguity through the virtual serious game Kalliste Decision Task.

机构信息

Department of Psychobiology, Universitat de València, Av. Blasco Ibáñez, 13, 46010, Valencia, Spain.

Instituto Universitario de Automática e Informática Industrial, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2024 Jun 7;14(1):13144. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63752-y.

DOI:10.1038/s41598-024-63752-y
PMID:38849446
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11161587/
Abstract

Traditional methods for evaluating decision-making provide valuable insights yet may fall short in capturing the complexity of this cognitive capacity, often providing insufficient for the multifaceted nature of decisions. The Kalliste Decision Task (KDT) is introduced as a comprehensive, ecologically valid tool aimed at bridging this gap, offering a holistic perspective on decision-making. In our study, 81 participants completed KDT alongside established tasks and questionnaires, including the Mixed Gamble Task (MGT), Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), and Stimulating & Instrumental Risk Questionnaire (S&IRQ). They also completed the User Satisfaction Evaluation Questionnaire (USEQ). The results showed excellent usability, with high USEQ scores, highlighting the user-friendliness of KDT. Importantly, KDT outcomes showed significant correlations with classical decision-making variables, shedding light on participants' risk attitudes (S&IRQ), rule-based decision-making (MGT), and performance in ambiguous contexts (IGT). Moreover, hierarchical clustering analysis of KDT scores categorized participants into three distinct profiles, revealing significant differences between them on classical measures. The findings highlight KDT as a valuable tool for assessing decision-making, addressing limitations of traditional methods, and offering a comprehensive, ecologically valid approach that aligns with the complexity and heterogeneity of real-world decision-making, advancing research and providing insights for understanding and assessing decision-making across multiple domains.

摘要

传统的决策评估方法提供了有价值的见解,但可能无法捕捉到这种认知能力的复杂性,往往无法充分反映决策的多面性质。引入 Kalliste 决策任务 (KDT) 作为一种全面、生态有效的工具,旨在弥补这一差距,提供决策的整体视角。在我们的研究中,81 名参与者在完成了包括混合赌博任务 (MGT)、爱荷华赌博任务 (IGT) 和刺激与工具风险问卷 (S&IRQ) 在内的既定任务和问卷后,还完成了用户满意度评估问卷 (USEQ)。结果显示其具有出色的可用性,USEQ 得分很高,突出了 KDT 的易用性。重要的是,KDT 结果与经典决策变量显著相关,揭示了参与者的风险态度 (S&IRQ)、基于规则的决策 (MGT) 和在模糊情境下的表现 (IGT)。此外,KDT 分数的层次聚类分析将参与者分为三个不同的特征群组,表明它们在经典测度上存在显著差异。这些发现突显了 KDT 作为评估决策的有价值工具的作用,解决了传统方法的局限性,并提供了一种全面、生态有效的方法,与现实世界决策的复杂性和异质性相吻合,推进了研究并为理解和评估多个领域的决策提供了见解。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df5b/11161587/e4fdfa47a27f/41598_2024_63752_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df5b/11161587/1335db16503b/41598_2024_63752_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df5b/11161587/e4fdfa47a27f/41598_2024_63752_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df5b/11161587/1335db16503b/41598_2024_63752_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df5b/11161587/e4fdfa47a27f/41598_2024_63752_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
An ecological assessment of decision-making under risk and ambiguity through the virtual serious game Kalliste Decision Task.通过虚拟严重游戏 Kalliste 决策任务对风险和不确定性下的决策进行生态评估。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jun 7;14(1):13144. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-63752-y.
2
Strategic and non-strategic problem gamblers differ on decision-making under risk and ambiguity.策略性和非策略性赌徒在风险和模糊情境下的决策存在差异。
Addiction. 2014 Jul;109(7):1128-37. doi: 10.1111/add.12494. Epub 2014 Mar 3.
3
Dissociation between decision making under ambiguity and risk in patients with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.青少年肌阵挛癫痫患者在模糊决策和风险下的分离。
Epilepsy Behav. 2019 Dec;101(Pt A):106548. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2019.106548. Epub 2019 Oct 31.
4
Decision-making impairment in patients with multiple sclerosis: a case-control study.多发性硬化症患者的决策障碍:一项病例对照研究。
BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 29;4(7):e004918. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-004918.
5
Decision making under ambiguity but not under risk is related to problem gambling severity.在模糊情境下的决策而非风险下的决策与赌博严重程度有关。
Psychiatry Res. 2012 Dec 30;200(2-3):568-74. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.03.053. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
6
Impaired decision making under ambiguity but not under risk in individuals with pathological buying-behavioral and psychophysiological evidence.病理性购买行为个体在模糊情境下而非风险情境下的决策受损:行为和心理生理学证据。
Psychiatry Res. 2015 Sep 30;229(1-2):551-8. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2015.05.043. Epub 2015 Jun 11.
7
Decision-making deficits in pathological gambling: the role of executive functions, explicit knowledge and impulsivity in relation to decisions made under ambiguity and risk.病理性赌博中的决策缺陷:执行功能、明确知识和冲动性在不确定性和风险下做出决策中的作用。
Am J Addict. 2013 Sep-Oct;22(5):492-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.12061.x. Epub 2013 May 30.
8
The role of strategies in deciding advantageously in ambiguous and risky situations.策略在模糊和风险情境中做出有利决策时所起的作用。
Cogn Process. 2008 Aug;9(3):159-73. doi: 10.1007/s10339-008-0204-4. Epub 2008 Jan 30.
9
Cognitive correlates of under-ambiguity and under-risk decision making in high-functioning patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis.复发缓解型多发性硬化症高功能患者中低模糊度和低风险决策的认知相关性。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2014;36(10):1066-75. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2014.971718. Epub 2014 Dec 8.
10
Selective impairment of decision making under ambiguity in alexithymia.述情障碍者在模糊情境下决策能力的选择性损伤。
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Nov 28;17(1):378. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1537-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Highly logical and non-emotional decisions in both risky and social contexts: understanding decision making in autism spectrum disorder through computational modeling.在风险和社交情境下做出高度理性且非情绪化的决策:通过计算建模理解自闭症谱系障碍中的决策制定。
Cogn Process. 2024 Aug;25(3):503-512. doi: 10.1007/s10339-024-01182-4. Epub 2024 Mar 25.
2
Mapping a comprehensive assessment tool to a holistic definition of health for person-centred care planning in home care: a modified eDelphi study.为居家护理中的以患者为中心的护理计划制定全面评估工具与整体健康定义建立映射关系:一项改良版 e Delphi 研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Nov 16;23(1):1268. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-10203-5.
3
Later stages of acute stress impair reinforcement-learning and feedback sensitivity in decision making.
急性应激的后期阶段会损害决策中的强化学习和反馈敏感性。
Biol Psychol. 2023 May;180:108585. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2023.108585. Epub 2023 May 11.
4
Implicit Negativity Bias Leads to Greater Loss Aversion and Learning during Decision-Making.内隐负性偏见导致决策时更大的损失规避和学习。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 19;19(24):17037. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192417037.
5
Cognitive mechanisms underlying decision making involving risk of explicit punishment in male and female rats.男性和女性大鼠中涉及明确惩罚风险的决策的认知机制。
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2023 Apr;23(2):248-275. doi: 10.3758/s13415-022-01052-6. Epub 2022 Dec 20.
6
The Genetics of Risk Aversion: A Systematic Review.风险规避的遗传学:系统评价。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 2;19(21):14307. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192114307.
7
Modeling fast-and-frugal heuristics.快速启发式模型。
Psych J. 2022 Aug;11(4):600-611. doi: 10.1002/pchj.576. Epub 2022 Jul 1.
8
Enhanced rationality in autism spectrum disorder.自闭症谱系障碍中的增强理性。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2021 Aug;25(8):685-696. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.05.004. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
9
Early stages of the acute physical stress response increase loss aversion and learning on decision making: A Bayesian approach.急性生理应激反应早期增加了损失规避和决策学习:一种贝叶斯方法。
Physiol Behav. 2021 Aug 1;237:113459. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2021.113459. Epub 2021 May 12.
10
Interoception moderates the relation between alexithymia and risky-choices in a framing task: A proposal of two-stage model of decision-making.内感受性调节了述情障碍与框架任务中风险选择之间的关系:一个两阶段决策模型的提议。
Int J Psychophysiol. 2021 Apr;162:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.01.002. Epub 2021 Jan 20.