9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Winning and Losing: Effects on Impulsive Action

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In the present study, we examined the effect of wins and losses on impulsive action in gambling (Experiments 1–3) and nongambling tasks (Experiments 4–5). In each experiment, subjects performed a simple task in which they had to win points. On each trial, they had to choose between a gamble and a nongamble. The gamble was always associated with a higher amount but a lower probability of winning than the nongamble. After subjects indicated their choice (i.e., gamble or not), feedback was presented. They had to press a key to start the next trial. Experiments 1–3 showed that, compared to the nongambling baseline, subjects were faster to initiate the next trial after a gambled loss, indicating that losses can induce impulsive actions. In Experiments 4 and 5, subjects alternated between the gambling task and a neutral decision-making task in which they could not win or lose points. Subjects were faster in the neutral decision-making task if they had just lost in the gambling task, suggesting that losses have a general effect on action. Our results challenge the dominant idea that humans become more cautious after suboptimal outcomes. Instead, they indicate that losses in the context of potential rewards are emotional events that increase impulsivity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Anger is an approach-related affect: evidence and implications.

          The authors review a range of evidence concerning the motivational underpinnings of anger as an affect, with particular reference to the relationship between anger and anxiety or fear. The evidence supports the view that anger relates to an appetitive or approach motivational system, whereas anxiety relates to an aversive or avoidance motivational system. This evidence appears to have 2 implications. One implication concerns the nature of anterior cortical asymmetry effects. The evidence suggests that such asymmetry reflects direction of motivational engagement (approach vs. withdrawal) rather than affective valence. The other implication concerns the idea that affects form a purely positive dimension and a purely negative dimension, which reflect the operation of appetitive and aversive motivational systems, respectively. The evidence reviewed does not support that view. The evidence is, however, consistent with a discrete-emotions view (which does not rely on dimensionality) and with an alternative dimensional approach. (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The Neural Basis of Error Detection: Conflict Monitoring and the Error-Related Negativity.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms.

              The stop-signal paradigm is very useful for the study of response inhibition. Stop-signal performance is typically described as a race between a go process, triggered by a go stimulus, and a stop process, triggered by the stop signal. Response inhibition depends on the relative finishing time of these two processes. Numerous studies have shown that the independent horse-race model of Logan and Cowan [Logan, G.D., Cowan, W.B., 1984. On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a theory of an act of control. Psychological Review 91, 295-327] accounts for the data very well. In the present article, we review the independent horse-race model and related models, such as the interactive horse-race model [Boucher, L., Palmeri, T.J., Logan, G.D., Schall, J.D., 2007. Inhibitory control in mind and brain: an interactive race model of countermanding saccades. Psychological Review 114, 376-397]. We present evidence that favors the independent horse-race model but also some evidence that challenges the model. We end with a discussion of recent models that elaborate the role of a stop process in inhibiting a response.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Role: Incoming Editor
                Journal
                J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform
                J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform
                Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance
                American Psychological Association
                0096-1523
                1939-1277
                3 November 2016
                January 2017
                : 43
                : 1
                : 147-168
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychology, University of Exeter
                [2 ]Department of Psychology, Cardiff University
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, University of Exeter
                Author notes
                This work was supported by an Economic and Social Research Council Grant (ES/J00815X/1) to Frederick Verbruggen, Christopher D. Chambers, and Ian P. L. McLaren; a starting grant to Frederick Verbruggen from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013; ERC Grant Agreement Number 312445); and a Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council Grant (BB/K008277/1) to Christopher D. Chambers and Frederick Verbruggen. Frederick Verbruggen is a Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award holder. We are very grateful to Myriam Mertens for testing all subjects and providing valuable data management support. We thank Lee Hogarth, Aureliu Lavric, Iring Koch, and Senne Braem for their comments and feedback.
                [*] [* ]Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Frederick Verbruggen, Department of Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG United Kingdom f.l.j.verbruggen@ 123456exeter.ac.uk
                Article
                xhp_43_1_147 2016-53079-001
                10.1037/xhp0000284
                5178881
                27808548
                c1f03618-23ce-40f4-934b-3072c9467687
                © 2016 The Author(s)

                This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s). Author(s) grant(s) the American Psychological Association the exclusive right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.

                History
                : 2 March 2016
                : 2 June 2016
                : 7 June 2016
                Categories
                Reports

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                cognitive control,gambling,impulsive action,sequential effects,emotion

                Comments

                Comment on this article