Limits...
Neural Correlates of Successful and Unsuccessful Strategical Mechanisms Involved in Uncertain Decision-Making.

Giustiniani J, Gabriel D, Nicolier M, Monnin J, Haffen E - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: No neural difference was found between each group before the selection of a deck, but in both groups a greater negativity was found emerging from the right superior frontal gyrus 600 ms before a disadvantageous selection.During the processing of the feedback, an attenuation of the P200 and P300 waveforms was found for the Undecided group, and a P300 originating from the medial frontal gyrus was found in response to a loss only in the Favorable group.Our results suggest that undecided subjects are hyposensitive to the valence of the cards during gambling, which affects the feedback processing.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital, Besançon, France; CIC-1431 Inserm, University Hospital, Besançon, France.

ABSTRACT
The ability to develop successful long-term strategies in uncertain situations relies on complex neural mechanisms. Although lesion studies have shown some of the mechanisms involved, it is still unknown why some healthy subjects are able to make the right decision whereas others are not. The aim of our study was to investigate neurophysiological differences underlying this ability to develop a successful strategy in a group of healthy subjects playing a monetary card game called the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). In this task, subjects have to win and earn money by choosing between four decks of cards, two were advantageous in the long term and two disadvantageous. Twenty healthy right-handed subjects performed the IGT while their cerebral activity was recorded by electroencephalography. Based on their behavioral performances, two groups of subjects could clearly be distinguished: one who selected the good decks and thus succeeded in developing a Favorable strategy (9 subjects) and one who remained Undecided (11 subjects). No neural difference was found between each group before the selection of a deck, but in both groups a greater negativity was found emerging from the right superior frontal gyrus 600 ms before a disadvantageous selection. During the processing of the feedback, an attenuation of the P200 and P300 waveforms was found for the Undecided group, and a P300 originating from the medial frontal gyrus was found in response to a loss only in the Favorable group. Our results suggest that undecided subjects are hyposensitive to the valence of the cards during gambling, which affects the feedback processing.

No MeSH data available.


Feedback processing.Top: Feedback processing on the electrode Fz. Middle: surface topography for gain and loss in both groups of subject. Down: source imaging.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4472228&req=5

pone.0130871.g004: Feedback processing.Top: Feedback processing on the electrode Fz. Middle: surface topography for gain and loss in both groups of subject. Down: source imaging.

Mentions: The analysis of the P200 showed that its amplitude was not modified by the Outcome (gain/loss) (F(1,18)= 0.4115; N.S), by Outcome x Groups (Favorable/Undecided) (F(1.18)= 0.0846; N.S), and by Outcome x Groups x Electrodes (F(5.90)= 0.5163; N.S). However, significant differences were observed between Groups x Electrodes (F(5.90)= 6.8502; p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis revealed that the P200 was more positive for the Favorable group than for the Undecided group regarding the frontal electrodes (LSD test; Fpz: p = 0.01; Fz: p = 0.004) (Fig 4). These differences were confirmed by source imaging which showed an activity in the cingulate gyrus noticeable for the Favorable group alone.


Neural Correlates of Successful and Unsuccessful Strategical Mechanisms Involved in Uncertain Decision-Making.

Giustiniani J, Gabriel D, Nicolier M, Monnin J, Haffen E - PLoS ONE (2015)

Feedback processing.Top: Feedback processing on the electrode Fz. Middle: surface topography for gain and loss in both groups of subject. Down: source imaging.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4472228&req=5

pone.0130871.g004: Feedback processing.Top: Feedback processing on the electrode Fz. Middle: surface topography for gain and loss in both groups of subject. Down: source imaging.
Mentions: The analysis of the P200 showed that its amplitude was not modified by the Outcome (gain/loss) (F(1,18)= 0.4115; N.S), by Outcome x Groups (Favorable/Undecided) (F(1.18)= 0.0846; N.S), and by Outcome x Groups x Electrodes (F(5.90)= 0.5163; N.S). However, significant differences were observed between Groups x Electrodes (F(5.90)= 6.8502; p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis revealed that the P200 was more positive for the Favorable group than for the Undecided group regarding the frontal electrodes (LSD test; Fpz: p = 0.01; Fz: p = 0.004) (Fig 4). These differences were confirmed by source imaging which showed an activity in the cingulate gyrus noticeable for the Favorable group alone.

Bottom Line: No neural difference was found between each group before the selection of a deck, but in both groups a greater negativity was found emerging from the right superior frontal gyrus 600 ms before a disadvantageous selection.During the processing of the feedback, an attenuation of the P200 and P300 waveforms was found for the Undecided group, and a P300 originating from the medial frontal gyrus was found in response to a loss only in the Favorable group.Our results suggest that undecided subjects are hyposensitive to the valence of the cards during gambling, which affects the feedback processing.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Clinical Psychiatry, University Hospital, Besançon, France; CIC-1431 Inserm, University Hospital, Besançon, France.

ABSTRACT
The ability to develop successful long-term strategies in uncertain situations relies on complex neural mechanisms. Although lesion studies have shown some of the mechanisms involved, it is still unknown why some healthy subjects are able to make the right decision whereas others are not. The aim of our study was to investigate neurophysiological differences underlying this ability to develop a successful strategy in a group of healthy subjects playing a monetary card game called the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). In this task, subjects have to win and earn money by choosing between four decks of cards, two were advantageous in the long term and two disadvantageous. Twenty healthy right-handed subjects performed the IGT while their cerebral activity was recorded by electroencephalography. Based on their behavioral performances, two groups of subjects could clearly be distinguished: one who selected the good decks and thus succeeded in developing a Favorable strategy (9 subjects) and one who remained Undecided (11 subjects). No neural difference was found between each group before the selection of a deck, but in both groups a greater negativity was found emerging from the right superior frontal gyrus 600 ms before a disadvantageous selection. During the processing of the feedback, an attenuation of the P200 and P300 waveforms was found for the Undecided group, and a P300 originating from the medial frontal gyrus was found in response to a loss only in the Favorable group. Our results suggest that undecided subjects are hyposensitive to the valence of the cards during gambling, which affects the feedback processing.

No MeSH data available.