ERP correlates of complex human decision making in a gambling paradigm: Detection and resolution of conflict

Abstract

ERP correlates of complex human decision making in a gambling paradigmMennes, M.; Wouters, H.; Van den Bergh, B.R.H.; Lagae, L.; Stiers, P. Published in: Psychophysiology Publication date: 2008 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA):Mennes, M., Wouters, H., Van den Bergh, B. R. H., Lagae, L., & Stiers, P. (2008). ERP correlates of complex human decision making in a gambling paradigm: Detection and resolution of conflict. Psychophysiology, 45(5), 714-720. General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research -You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain -You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. AbstractThe present event-related potential study investigated the correlates of decision making in relation to the amount of response conflict. In a gambling paradigm, response conflict was introduced by giving participants the option to either gamble or pass. Second, the odds and gains in each trial were manipulated to make the decision to gamble or pass determined or underdetermined. Underdetermined trials included an extra conflict. The N2 was modulated by the mere presence of conflict. In contrast to both conflict monitoring and inhibition theories for N2, these results suggest that an enhancement in N2 reflects the mere detection of conflicting alternatives. The P3 showed a fronto-central increase in amplitude in trials including two forms of response conflict compared to trials including only one conflict. These findings suggest that P3 reflects part of the conflict resolution processes.

Distributed task coding throughout the multiple demand network of the human frontal–insular cortex

“…Gambling (Mennes et al, 2008) In each trial a horizontal bar was presented with a proportional division (range 0.5/0.5 to 0.05/0.95) of colour (blue-yellow) that varied from trial to trial. Participants had to guess which of the two coloured sides hid a fictitious token and indicate their choice by pressing the corresponding button.…”

Resting-state EEG power predicts conflict-related brain activity in internally guided but not in externally guided decision-making

“…Many studies of decision-making have addressed situations in which one particular more or less predictable answer is available (externally guided decision-making; Nakao et al (2012)). These studies have revealed that a key regulatory process in externally guided decisionmaking is the ability to monitor and resolve conflict between correct responses and erroneous responses (Bland and Schaefer, 2011;Botvinick, 2007;Botvinick et al, 2001;Mennes et al, 2008;Smith et al, 2009;Smoski et al, 2009). Especially, event-related brain potential (ERP) reports have described that the strength of conflict between correct and error response is reflected in the amplitudes of fronto-central stimulus-locked N2 (Bartholow et al, 2005;Fritzsche et al, 2010;van Veen and Carter, 2002b;Yeung et al, 2004) and response-locked correct/conflict-related negativity (CRN) (Bartholow et al, 2005;Fritzsche et al, 2010;Masaki et al, 2007;Simon-Thomas and Knight, 2005;Vidal et al, 2003) as well as reaction times (RTs) (Fritzsche et al, 2010;Masaki et al, 2007;Takezawa and Miyatani, 2005).…”

“Wanted!” The effects of reward on face recognition: electrophysiological correlates

“…The P300 has been associated with attention, motivation, and stimulus salience (for a review, see Hajcak, MacNamara, & Olvet, 2010;Polich, 2007), which are linked to reward processing (Ressler, 2004), and it has also been related to various aspects of outcome evaluation (Kamarajan, Porjesz, Rangaswamy, Tang, Chorlian, Padmanabhapillai and Begleiter 2009;Mennes, Wouters, van den Bergh, Lagae & Stiers 2008;Yeung, Holroyd, & Cohen, 2005;Yeung & Sanfey, 2004). Importantly, a correlation between an enhanced centro-parietal P300 and the magnitude of the reward was recently found by Goldstein and coworkers (2006), showing that this component is sensitive to reward value.…”