Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2014
Strategic and non-strategic problem gamblers differ on decision-making under risk and ambiguity.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lorains Felicity K, Dowling Nicki A, Enticott Peter G, Bradshaw John L, Trueblood Jennifer S, Stout Julie C
Аннотация
AIMS: To analyse problem gamblers' decision-making under conditions of risk and ambiguity, investigate underlying psychological factors associated with their choice behaviour and examine whether decision-making differed in strategic (e.g., sports betting) and non-strategic (e.g., electronic gaming machine) problem gamblers.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Out-patient treatment centres and university testing facilities in Victoria, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine problem gamblers and 41 age, gender and estimated IQ-matched controls.
MEASUREMENTS: Decision-making tasks included the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and a loss aversion task. The Prospect Valence Learning (PVL) model was used to provide an explanation of cognitive, motivational and response style factors involved in IGT performance.
FINDINGS: Overall, problem gamblers performed more poorly than controls on both the IGT (P = 0.04) and the loss aversion task (P = 0.01), and their IGT decisions were associated with heightened attention to gains (P = 0.003) and less consistency (P = 0.002). Strategic problem gamblers did not differ from matched controls on either decision-making task, but non-strategic problem gamblers performed worse on both the IGT (P = 0.006) and the loss aversion task (P = 0.02). Furthermore, we found differences in the PVL model parameters underlying strategic and non-strategic problem gamblers' choices on the IGT.
CONCLUSIONS: Problem gamblers demonstrated poor decision-making under conditions of risk and ambiguity. Strategic (e.g. sports betting, poker) and non-strategic (e.g. electronic gaming machines) problem gamblers differed in decision-making and the underlying psychological processes associated with their decisions.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Out-patient treatment centres and university testing facilities in Victoria, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine problem gamblers and 41 age, gender and estimated IQ-matched controls.
MEASUREMENTS: Decision-making tasks included the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and a loss aversion task. The Prospect Valence Learning (PVL) model was used to provide an explanation of cognitive, motivational and response style factors involved in IGT performance.
FINDINGS: Overall, problem gamblers performed more poorly than controls on both the IGT (P = 0.04) and the loss aversion task (P = 0.01), and their IGT decisions were associated with heightened attention to gains (P = 0.003) and less consistency (P = 0.002). Strategic problem gamblers did not differ from matched controls on either decision-making task, but non-strategic problem gamblers performed worse on both the IGT (P = 0.006) and the loss aversion task (P = 0.02). Furthermore, we found differences in the PVL model parameters underlying strategic and non-strategic problem gamblers' choices on the IGT.
CONCLUSIONS: Problem gamblers demonstrated poor decision-making under conditions of risk and ambiguity. Strategic (e.g. sports betting, poker) and non-strategic (e.g. electronic gaming machines) problem gamblers differed in decision-making and the underlying psychological processes associated with their decisions.