Neural Mechanisms Underlying Compensatory and Noncompensatory Strategies in Risky Choice

Development of decision making based on internal and external information: A hierarchical Bayesian approach

In decision making, people may rely on their own information as well as on information from external sources, such as family members, peers, or experts. The current study investigated how these types of information are used by comparing four decision strategies: 1) an internal strategy that relies solely on own information; 2) an external strategy that relies solely on the information from an external source; 3) a sequential strategy that relies on information from an external source only after own information is deemed inadequate; 4) an integrative strategy that relies on an integration of both types of information. Of specific interest were individual and developmental differences in strategy use. Strategy use was examined via Bayesian hierarchical mixture model analysis. A visual decision task was administered to children and young adolescents (N=305, ages 9–14). Individual differences but no age-related changes were observed in either decision accuracy or strategy use. The internal strategy was dominant across ages, followed by the integrative and sequential strategy, respectively, while the external strategy was extremely rare. This suggests a reluctance to rely entirely on information provided by external sources. We conclude that there are individual differences but not developmental changes in strategy use pertaining to perceptual decision-making in 9- through 14-year-olds. Generalizability of these findings is discussed with regard to different forms of social influence and varying perceptions of the external source. This study provides stepping stones in better understanding and modeling decision making processes in the presence of both internal and external information.

Quantitative or qualitative development in decision making?

A key question in the developmental sciences is whether developmental differences are quantitative or qualitative. For example, does age increase the speed in processing a task (quantitative differences) or does age affect the way a task is processed (qualitative differences)? Until now, findings in the domain of decision making have been based on the assumption that developmental differences are either quantitative or qualitative. In the current study, we took a different approach in which we tested whether development is best described as being quantitative or qualitative. We administered a judgment version and a choice version of a decision-making task to a developmental sample (n_judgment = 109 and n_choice = 137; M_age = 12.5 years, age range = 9-18). The task, the so-called Gambling Machine Task, required decisions between two options characterized by constant gains and probabilistic losses; these characteristics were known beforehand and thus did not need to be learned from experience. Data were analyzed by comparing the fit of quantitative and qualitative latent variable models, so-called multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) models. Results indicated that individual differences in both judgment and choice tasks were quantitative and pertained to individual differences in "consideration of gains," that is, to what extent decisions were guided by gains. These differences were affected by age in the judgment version, but not in the choice version, of the task. We discuss implications for theories of decision making and discuss potential limitations and extensions. We also argue that the MIMIC approach is useful in other domains, for example, to test quantitative versus qualitative development of categorization, reasoning, math, and memory.

Neural tracking of subjective value under riskand ambiguity in adolescence

Although many neuroimaging studies on adolescent risk taking have focused on brain activation during outcome valuation, less attention has been paid to the neural correlates of choice valuation. Subjective choice valuation may be particularly influenced by whether a choice presents risk (known probabilities) or ambiguity (unknown probabilities), which has rarely been studied in developmental samples. Therefore, we examined the neural tracking of subjective value during choice under risk and ambiguity in a large sample of adolescents (N = 188, 12–22 years). Specifically, we investigated which brain regions tracked subjective value coding under risk and ambiguity. A model-based approach to estimate individuals’ risk and ambiguity attitudes showed prominent variation in individuals’ aversions to risk and ambiguity. Furthermore, participants subjectively experienced the ambiguous options as being riskier than the risky options. Subjective value tracking under risk was coded by activation in ventral striatum and superior parietal cortex. Subjective value tracking under ambiguity was coded by dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) and superior temporal gyrus activation. Finally, overlapping activation in the dorsomedial PFC was observed for subjective value under both conditions. Overall, this is the first study to chart brain activation patterns for subjective choice valuation under risk and ambiguity in an adolescent sample, which shows that the building blocks for risk and ambiguity processing are already present in early adolescence. Finally, we highlight the potential of combining behavioral modeling with fMRI for investigating choice valuation in adolescence, which may ultimately aid in understanding who takes risks and why.

Computational neuroscience across the lifespan: Promises and pitfalls

In recent years, the application of computational modeling in studies on age-related changes in decision making and learning has gained in popularity. One advantage of computational models is that they provide access to latent variables that cannot be directly observed from behavior. In combination with experimental manipulations, these latent variables can help to test hypotheses about age-related changes in behavioral and neurobiological measures at a level of specificity that is not achievable with descriptive analysis approaches alone. This level of specificity can in turn be beneficial to establish the identity of the corresponding behavioral and neurobiological mechanisms. In this paper, we will illustrate applications of computational methods using examples of lifespan research on risk taking, strategy selection and reinforcement learning. We will elaborate on problems that can occur when computational neuroscience methods are applied to data of different age groups. Finally, we will discuss potential targets for future applications and outline general shortcomings of computational neuroscience methods for research on human lifespan development.

Neural Mechanisms Underlying Risk and Ambiguity Attitudes

Individual differences in attitudes to risk (a taste for risk, known probabilities) and ambiguity (a tolerance for uncertainty, unknown probabilities) differentially influence risky decision-making. However, it is not well understood whether risk and ambiguity are coded differently within individuals. Here, we tested whether individual differences in risk and ambiguity attitudes were reflected in distinct neural correlates during choice and outcome processing of risky and ambiguous gambles. To these ends, we developed a neuroimaging task in which participants ( n = 50) chose between a sure gain and a gamble, which was either risky or ambiguous, and presented decision outcomes (gains, no gains). From a separate task in which the amount, probability, and ambiguity level were varied, we estimated individuals' risk and ambiguity attitudes. Although there was pronounced neural overlap between risky and ambiguous gambling in a network typically related to decision-making under uncertainty, relatively more risk-seeking attitudes were associated with increased activation in valuation regions of the brain (medial and lateral OFC), whereas relatively more ambiguity-seeking attitudes were related to temporal cortex activation. In addition, although striatum activation was observed during reward processing irrespective of a prior risky or ambiguous gamble, reward processing after an ambiguous gamble resulted in enhanced dorsomedial PFC activation, possibly functioning as a general signal of uncertainty coding. These findings suggest that different neural mechanisms reflect individual differences in risk and ambiguity attitudes and that risk and ambiguity may impact overt risk-taking behavior in different ways.