(54.236.58.220) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/27 12:00
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳思穎
研究生(外文):Szu-Yin Chen
論文名稱:期望值、輸贏頻率與享樂尋求特質對決策行為之影響-以愛荷華/東吳賭局作業為例
論文名稱(外文):The Influence of Expected Value, Gain-Loss Frequency and Fun Seeking Trait on Decision Making in the Iowa Gambling Task/ Soochow Gambling Task
指導教授:邱耀初邱耀初引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yao-Chu Chiu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:東吳大學
系所名稱:心理學系
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:心理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2011
畢業學年度:99
語文別:中文
論文頁數:88
中文關鍵詞:愛荷華賭局作業東吳賭局作業行為激發與行為抑制量表期望值輸贏頻率享樂尋求
外文關鍵詞:Iowa Gambling TaskSoochow Gambling TaskBehavioral Inhibition Scale/Behavioral Activation ScalesExpected valueGain-loss frequencyFun seeking
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:596
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:154
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
研究目的:愛荷華賭局作業(Bechara et al., 1994, 簡稱IGT)近年來已為評估決策行為的重要指標,僅有少數研究將IGT同時應用在人格特質的研究(如:使用行為抑制與行為激發量表, BIS/BAS; Carver & White, 1994),但這系列研究至今已呈現矛盾與不一致的結果。本研究認為主要原因可能來自以下兩個問題:1.忽略IGT設計上同時期望值與輸贏頻率兩個變項混淆之缺點,而僅採期望值的觀點作為分析的基礎;2.忽略IGT四疊牌各自的屬性,而將A、B牌合併為壞牌與C、D牌合併為好牌的方式予以分析。研究方法:本研究嘗試設計兩個實驗解決此問題,實驗一以攤開IGT四疊牌的分析方式,加入逆轉版IGT,重新檢驗期望值、輸贏頻率與享樂尋求特質之間的關聯性,實驗二以東吳賭局作業(Soochow gambling task, SGT)取代IGT,用以解決IGT混淆變項的問題。分別依期望值與輸贏頻率的觀點,檢驗受試者在IGT/rIGT/SGT與享樂尋求的相關及高、低享樂尋求特質者在IGT/rIGT/SGT選擇偏好的表現。研究結果:大部分正常人在賭局作業中的決策表現較支持輸贏頻率之觀點,與期望值之觀點相牴觸。而BIS/BAS量表中,享樂尋求量表似乎與輸贏頻率之關聯性較高。本研究採用IGT與BIS/BAS量表與過去的研究同樣得出不穩定之現象,但可觀察到享樂尋求特質與輸贏頻率在rIGT及SGT間的關係。
Purpose: Within the last sixteen years, the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) has become an index used to evaluate decision making behavior, although in that time little research has applied the IGT towards personality research(for example, Behavioral Inhibition Scale/Behavioral Activation Scales:BIS/BAS scales). However, the research concerning personality that has been completed has proven to vary considerably, with very little continuity existing between those sources. This study attempts to show that the reason for the variance found in previous research is because of two main issues: 1) It failed to consider the expected values and the gain-loss frequency, which are combined into the design of the IGT. Also, this research analyzed the data only using expected values. 2) It also failed to consider the nature of four decks of cards, thus analyzing the data by adding decks ‘A’ and ‘B’ together as bad cards and decks ‘C’ and ‘D’ together as good cards. Method: This study tried to design two experiments to solve these problems. Experiment 1 analyzed each of the four decks independently using the reverse version IGT (rIGT) and IGT. It reexamined the relationship between the expected values, the gain-loss frequency and the fun seeking trait. Experiment 2 used the Soochow Gambling Task (SGT) to replace the IGT and resolve its confounding variables. It reexamined the behavioral preferences of the subjects and the correlation between the IGT, rIGT, SGT and the fun seeking trait using expected values and the gain-loss frequency. This experiment separated the subjects into low vs. high fun seeking score categories to analyze their behavioral preferences of the three tasks using the expected values and the gain-loss frequency. Result: The decision making behavior made by most people in gambling tasks supported the view of the gain-loss frequency. In the BIS/BAS scales, the fun seeking scale seemed related more to the gain-loss frequency. The results of this study were unstable, just as with previous research done by using the IGT and the BIS/BAS scales. This study observed a relationship between the fun seeking scale and the gain-loss frequency when using the rIGT and SGT.
緒論.................................................1
研究背景與動機.......................................1
文獻探討.............................................5
第一節 愛荷華賭局作業................................5
一、 IGT的緣起.......................................5
二、 IGT的設計架構...................................5
三、 VMPFC病人在IGT中的決策表現......................7
第二節 以rIGT驗證影響IGT決策行為的主要因素:期望值...9
一、 rIGT的設計架構..................................9
二、 VMPFC病人在rIGT上的行為表現符合對未來結果不敏感的假設...................................................9
三、 比較VMPFC病人在IGT與rIGT的決策表現..............11
四、 比較正常人在IGT與rIGT的決策表現.................12
五、 小結............................................13
第三節 IGT與人格特質的關係...........................14
一、 IGT與人格量表的關係.............................14
二、 應用在IGT上相關的人格測驗.......................14
三、 小結............................................16
第四節 行為抑制與行為激發量表(BIS/BAS量表)...........17
一、 量表的理論架構:Gray’s Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory...................................................17
二、 BIS/BAS量表的發展...............................19
第五節 BIS/BAS量表在IGT研究中之議題..................21
一、 研究結果:綜論十五篇文獻研究之異同..............23
二、 分析方法:BIS/BAS量表計分應採用四因素法.........24
三、 Suhr團隊研究結果之異同:享樂尋求與IGT之間的關係.24
第六節 影響IGT決策行為的另一因素:輸贏頻率........26
一、 正常人在IGT與rIGT的決策表現:輸贏頻率V.S. 期望值26
二、 IGT設計架構之問題:奇異B牌的現象................27
三、 文獻中IGT的計分方式與奇異B牌現象之關係..........28
第七節 期望值、輸贏頻率與享樂尋求特質對決策行為之影響...................................................29
一、 綜論IGT-BIS/BAS相關文獻研究異同可能之原因.......29
1. 文獻中未攤開IGT四疊牌分析之問題...................29
2. 文獻中缺乏分析輸贏頻率之問題......................29
二、解決之道.........................................30
1. 合併IGT與rIGT作為驗證人格特質之實驗工具...........30
2. 使用SGT作為驗證人格特質之實驗工具.................31
三、 小結............................................33
實驗一:檢驗期望值、輸贏頻率與享樂尋求特質關係-以IGT/rIGT為例...................................................34
第一節 研究目的與假設................................34
一、 研究目的........................................34
二、 研究假設........................................34
第二節 研究方法......................................36
一、 研究對象........................................36
二、 研究工具........................................36
三、 實驗程序........................................38
四、 統計方法........................................39
第三節 研究結果......................................40
一、 IGT vs. BIS/BAS量表.............................40
二、 rIGT vs. BIS/BAS量表............................43
第四節 結果與討論....................................46
一、 IGT/rIGT結果不一致的原因之一:贏錢的金額大小....46
二、 IGT/rIGT結果不一致的原因之二:輸贏權重不同......47
三、 IGT/rIGT結果不一致的原因之三:C牌、rC牌的選擇變異性...................................................48
四、 為何期望值和輸贏頻率在rIGT皆達顯著:rIGT中的混淆變項...................................................48
五、 IGT與rIGT先後施測所出現的學習效果...............49
六、 小結............................................51
實驗二:檢驗期望值、輸贏頻率與享樂尋求特質關係-以SGT為例...................................................52
第一節 研究目的與假設................................52
一、 研究目的........................................52
二、 研究假設........................................52
第二節 研究方法......................................54
一、 研究對象........................................54
二、 研究工具........................................54
三、 實驗程序........................................55
四、 統計方法........................................55
第三節 研究結果......................................56
一、 SGT vs. BIS/BAS量表.............................56
第四節 結果與討論....................................59
綜合討論.............................................61
一、 臨床版與原始版IGT設計架構不同...................63
二、 去抑制化的個體其決策行為是酬賞導向..............63
三、 BAS量表中Fun Seeking量表的操作界定..............63
四、 自陳式量表與動態決策作業之差異..................64
五、 BIS/BAS量表建構之問題...........................65
六、 小結............................................65
研究限制與未來建議...................................66
研究限制.............................................66
一、 樣本的部份......................................66
二、 實驗的部份......................................66
三、 人格量表的部份..................................66
未來建議.............................................67
一、 IGT/rIGT宜分開施測..............................67
二、 宜攤開四疊牌並搭配不同設計架構的賭局作業........67
三、 研究假設可改用數學模型..........................67
四、 宜檢驗BIS/BAS各分量表與各決策作業之間的關係.....68
五、 宜使用BIS/BAS量表搭配其他決策作業...............68
六、 宜增加生理上的測量..............................68
研究貢獻.............................................70
一、 文獻整理方面:...................................70
二、 實驗設計方面:...................................70
三、 研究結果方面:..................................71
參考文獻.............................................72
附錄一:愛荷華賭局作業指導語.........................82
附錄二:愛荷華賭局作業第二階段指導語.................83
附錄三:中文版行為抑制與行為激發量表.................84
附錄四:IGT四十次輸贏架構表..........................86
附錄五:IGT/rIGT/SGT與BIS/BAS各分量表之相關係數整理..88
宋祖駿 (2010)。現役軍人憂鬱患者在愛荷華及東吳賭局中的表現─期望值和輸贏頻率之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。私立東吳大學心理學研究所碩士論文,台北市。
陳思穎、宋祖駿、顏世旭、林錦宏、邱耀初(2010年11月)。臨床版愛荷華賭局作業與人格特質關係之探討。「台灣心理學會第49屆心理學年會」張貼之論文,國立中正大學。
廖聆岑(2001)。反社會性格障礙與非反社會性格障礙男性在行為抑制與行為激發系統上之探討(未出版之碩士論文)。國立成功大學行為醫學研究所碩士論文,台北市。
Ahn, W.Y., Busemeyer, J.R., Wagenmakers, E.J., & Stout, J.C. (2008). Comparison of decision learning models using the generalization criterion method. Cognitive
Science, 32, 1376-1402.
Appelt, K. C., Milch, K. F., Handgraaf, M. J. J., & Weber, E. U. (2011). The Decision Making Individual Differences Inventory and guidelines for the study of individual differences in judgment and decision-making research. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(3), 252-262.
Bechara, A. (2007). Iowa Gambling Task Professional Manual. Boca Raron, FL:Psychological Assessment Resources.
Bechara, A., Damasio, A.R., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S.W. (1994). Insensitivity To future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 50, 7–12.
Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Damasio, A. R., & Lee, G. P. (1999). Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 5473-5481.
Bechara, A., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (2000). Characterization of the decision-making deficit of patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions. Brain, 123(11), 2189–2202.
Brand, M., Greco, R., Schuster, A., Kalbe, E., Fujiwara, E., Markowitsch, H.J. & Kessler, J. (2002). The game of dice - a new test for the assessment of risktaking behavior. Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair, 16, 142-143.
Brenner, S. L., Beauchaine, T. P., & Sylvers, P. D. (2005). A comparison of psychophysiological and self-report measures of BAS and BIS activation. Psychophysiology, 42, 108–112. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00261.x
Brunborg, G. S., Johnsen, B. H., Pallesen, S., Molde, H., Mentzoni, R. A., & Myrseth, H. (2010). The relationship between aversive conditioning and risk-avoidance in gambling. Journal of gambling studies. 26, 545-559.
Buelow, M.T. (2009). The Influence of Nicotine Craving and Personality Characteristics on Risky Decision Making in Nicotine Dependence College Students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ohio.
Buelow, M.T., & Suhr, J.A., (2009). Construct validity of the Iowa Gambling Task. Neuropsychol Review. 19(1), 102-14.
Carver S.C. (2010, Oct 27). Re:BIS/BAS scales [ Web page comment]. Retrieved from http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/ccarver/sclBISBAS.html
Carver S.C., & White T.L. (1994). Behavioral Inhibition, Behavioral Activation, and the Affective Responses to Impending Reward and Punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319-333.
Caseras X., Avila C., & Torrubia R. (2003). The measurement of individual differences in Behavioural Inhibition and Behavioural Activation Systems: a comparison of personality scales. Personality and Individual Differences. 34. 999–1013
Chiu, Y. C., Huang, J. T., Song, T. J., Wang, C. C., Yeh, D. R., & Lin, C. H. (2009). Comparing the uncertainty effects of two payment procedures under an extended series of 300 trials in the Soochow Gambling Task. Poster session presented at Society for Neuroeconomics conference, Chicago, IL.
Chiu, Y. C., & Lin, C.H. (2007a). Is deck C an advantageous deck in the Iowa Gambling Task? Behavioral and Brain Functions, 3(37). doi:10.1186/1744-9081-4-13
Chiu, Y. C., & Lin, C.H. (2007b). Is deck E an advantageous deck in the inverted Iowa Gambling Task? Poster presented at the 6th Annual Meeting of Society for Neuroeconomics, Boston, MA.
Chiu, Y. C., Lin, C. H., Huang, J. T., Lin, S., Lee, P. L., & Hsieh, J. C. (2008). Immediate gain is long-term loss: Are there foresighted decision makers in the Iowa Gambling Task? Behavioral and Brain Functions, 4, 13. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-4-13
Corr, P. J. (2008). The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manuaL. Odessa, FL:Psychological Assessment Resources.
Crone, E. A., Vendel, I., & van der Molen, M. W. (2003). Decision-making in disinhibited adolescents and adults: Insensitivity to future consequences or driven by immediate reward? Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1625-1641.
Damasio, A., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (1991). Somatic Markers and the Guidance of Behavior: Theory and Preliminary Testing. In H. S. Levin, H. M. Eisenberg & A. L. Benton (Eds.), Frontal Lobe Function and Dysfunction (pp. 217-229). New York: Oxford University Press.
Damasio, A.R. (1994). Descartes' error: emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.
Damasio, H., Graboeski, T., Frank, R., Galaburda, A., & Damasio, A.R., (1994). The return of Phineas Gage: Clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science, 264, 1102-1105.
Danner, U.N., Ouwehand, C., van Haastert, N.L., Hornsveld, H., de Ridder, D.T.D. (2011). Decision making impairments in women with binge eating disorder in comparison to obese and normal weight women. European Eating Disorders Review. doi: 10.1002/erv.1098
Davis, C., Patte, K., Tweed, S., & Curtis, C. (2007). Personality traits associated with
decision-making deficits. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 279-290.
Desmeules, R., Bechara, A., & Dubé, L. (2008). Subjective valuation and asymmetrical motivational systems: Implications of scope Insensitivity for decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making , 21, 211-224.
de Verdier, L.(2008). Emption and cognition in the Iowa Gambling Test. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Stockholms, Sweden.
.Dirk, J. M. Smits & Boeck, P.D. (2006). From BIS/BAS to the Big Five. European Journal of Personality. 20, 255–270.
Dunn, B. D., Dalgleish, T., & Lawrence, A. D. (2006). The somatic marker hypothesis: A critical evaluation. Neuroscience Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(2), 239-271.
Franken, I. H. A., Georgieva, I., & Muris, P. (2006). The rich get richer and the
poor get poorer:On risk aversion in behavioral decision-making. Judgment and Decision Making, 1(2), 123–128.
Franken, I. H. A., & Muris, P. (2005). Individual differences in decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(5), 991–998.
Fernie, G., & Tunney, R. J. (2006). Some decks are better than others: the effect of
reinforcer type and task instructions on learning in the Iowa Gambling Task.
Brain and Cognition, 60(1), 94-102.
Fum, D., Napoli, A., & Stocco, A. (2008). Somatic markers and frequency effects: Does emotion really play a role on decision making in the Iowa Gambling Task? In Proceedings of 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1203–1208).
Goudriaan, A.E., Oosterlaan,J., de Beurs, E., & van den Brink, W. (2006). Psychophysiological determinants and concomitants of deficient decision making in pathological gamblers. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 84, 231–239.
Gray, J. A. (1987). The Psychology of Fear and Stress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In P. Ekman , & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions (pp. 243–247). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hammers, D. B. (2009). Neuropsychological, Personality, and Cerebral Oxygenation Correlates of Undergraduate Poly-Substance Use (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ohio.
Harmon-Jones, E., &Allen, J. J. B. (1997). Behavioral activation sensitivity and resting frontal EEG asymmetry: Covariation of putative indicators related to risk for mood disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106, 129–163.
Heubeck, B. G.,Wilkinson, R. B., & Cologon, J. (1998). A second look at Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 785–800. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00124-X
Hooper, C. J., Luciana, M., Wahlstrom, D., Conklin, H. M., & Yarger, R. S. (2008). Personality correlates of Iowa Gambling Task performance in healthy adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(3), 598-609.
Johnson, S. L., Turner, R. J., & Iwata, N. (2003). BIS/BAS levels and psychiatric disorder: An epidemiological study. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 25, 25–36.
Johnson, C. A., Xiao, L., Palmer, P., Sun, P., Wang, Q., Wei, Y., et al. (2008). Affective decision-making deficits, linked to a dysfunctional ventromedial prefrontal cortex, revealed in 10th grade Chinese adolescent binge drinkers. Neuropsychologia, 46(2), 714-726.
Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., & Phillips,W. (1964). Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs,78(578), 1–37.
Kahneman, D. &Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47 (2), 263–291. doi:10.2307/1914185
Kim, D. Y., & Lee, J. H. (2011). Effects of the BAS and BIS on decision-making in a gambling task. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(7), 1131-1135 doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.041
Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., Richards, J. B., Ramsey, S. E., Stuart, G. L.,…Brown, R. A. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: The balloon analogue risk task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75-84.
Lev, D., Hershkovitz, E.,& Yechiam, E. (2007). Decision making and personality in traffic offenders: A study of Israeli drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 40(1), 223-230.
Levin, I. P., Weller, J. A., Pederson, A., & Harshman, L. (2007). Age-related differences in adaptive decision making: Sensitivity to expected value in risky choice. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(4), 225-233.
Lin, C. H., & Chiu, Y. C. (2007). Gender difference of sensitivity for gain-loss frequency in the Soochow gambling task. Poster presented at the 6th Annual Meeting of Society for Neuroeconomics, Boston, MA.
Lin, C. H., Chiu, Y. C., Lee, P. L., & Hsieh, J. C. (2004). The preferences of decision-making in IOWA Gambling Task: The testing of frequency effect and long-term outcomes in Somatic Marker Hypothesis. 2nd Conference of NeuroEconnomics; Munster, Germany.
Lin, C. H., Chiu, Y. C., & Huang, J. T. (2009). Evaluating the “prominent deck B phenomenon” of the Iowa Gambling Task under the two payment procedures of gain and loss in an extended series of 300 trials. Poster presented at the 7th Annual Meeting of Society for Neuroeconomics. Evanston, Illinois
Lin, C.H., Chiu, Y.C., Lee, P.L., & Hsieh, J.C. (2007). Is deck B a disadvantageous deck in the Iowa Gambling Task? Behavioral and Brain Functions, 3, 16. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-3-16
Overman, W. H., Frassrand, K., Ansel, S., Trawalter, S., Bies, B., & Redmond, A. (2004). Performance on the IOWA card task by adolescents and adults. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1838–1851.
Peters, E. (1998). The springs of action: Affective and analytical information processing in choice (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oregon.
Peters, E. & Slovic, P. (2000). The springs of action: affective and analytical information processing in choice. Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 1465-1475.
Reimann. M., & Bechara, A. (2010). The somatic marker framework as a neurological theory of decision-making:Review, conceptual comparisons, and future neuroeconomics research. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 767–776.
Robert, D. R., Adrian, M. O., Hugh C. M., Emma J. W., John D. P., Barbara J. S., & Trevor, W. R. (1999) Choosing between small, likely rewards and large, unlikely rewards activates inferior and orbital prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience. 19(20), 9029–9038.
Ross D, Sharp C, Vuchinich RE, Spurrett D. (2008). Midbrain Mutiny: The Picoeconomics and Neuroeconomics of Disordered Gambling Economic Theory and Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Ross, S. R., Millis, S. R., Bonebright, T. L., & Bailley, S. E. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Behavioral Inhibition and Activation Scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 861–865. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00196-9
Sevy, S., Burdick, K. E., Visweswaraiah, H., Abdelmessih, S., Lukin, M., Yechiam, E., et al. (2007). Iowa gambling task in schizophrenia: a review and new data in patients with schizophrenia and co-occurring cannabis use disorders. Schizophrenia Research, 92(1-3), 74-84.
Singh, V., & Khan, A. (2009). Heterogeneity in choice on Iowa Gambling Task: preference for infrequenct-high magnitude punishment. Mind Soc, 8, 43-57. doi: 10.1007/s11299-008-0050-1.
Suhr, J. A., & Hammers, D. (2010). Who fails the Iowa Gambling Test (IGT)? Personality, neuropsychological, and near-infrared spectroscopy findings in healthy young controls. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 25(4), 293-302.
Suhr, J. A., & Tsanadis, J. (2007). Affect and personality correlates of the Iowa Gambling Task. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 27-36.
Takano, Y., Takahashi, N., Tanaka, D., & Hironaka, N. (2010). Big Losses Lead to Irrational Decision-Making in Gambling Situations: Relationship between Deliberation and Impulsivity. PloS one. 5(2): e9368. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009368
Toplak, M.E., Sorge, G.B., Benoit, A., West, R.F., & Stanovich, K.E. (2010). Decision-making and cognitive abilities: A review of associations between Iowa Gambling Task performance, executive functions, and intelligence. Clinical Psychology Review. 30, 562-581.
Tsanadis, J. (2005). Neuropsychological Correlates of Risk-Taking Behavior in an Undergraduate Populatio (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ohio.
van den Bos, R., Houx, B. B., & Spruijt, B. M. (2006). The effect of reward magnitude differences on choosing disadvantageous decks in the Iowa Gambling Task. Biological Psychology, 71, 155–161.
van Holst, R.J., van den Brink, W., Veltman, D.j., & Goudriaan, A.E.,(2010). Why gamblers fail to win:A review of cognitive and neuroimaging findings in pathological gambling. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Review, 34, 87-107.
van Honk, J., Hermans, E. J., Putman, P., Montagne, B., & Schulter, D. J. (2002). Defective somatic markers in subclinical psychopathy. Neuroreport, 13(8), 1025–1027.
van Toor, D. , Roozen, H. G. , Evans, B. E. , Rombout, L. , Van de Wetering, Ben J. M. & Vingerhoets, Ad J. J. M.(2010). The effects of psychiatric distress, inhibition, and impulsivity on decision making n patients with substance use disorders: A matched control study. Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, iFirst, 1-8.
Weller, J.A., Levin, I.P., & Bechara, A. (2010). Do individual differences in Iowa. Gambling Task performance predict adaptive decision making for risky gains and losses? Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32 (2), 141–150
Weller, J. A., Levin, I. P., Shiv, B., & Bechara, A. (2007). Neural correlates of adaptive decision making for risky gains and losses. Psychological Science, 18(11), 958-964. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02009.x
Wilder, K.E., Weinberger, D.R., & Goldberg, T.E., (1998). Operant conditioning and the orbitofrontal cortex in schizophrenic patients: unexpected evidence. Schizophrenia Research, 30, 169-174.
Yechiam, E., Busemeyer, J., Stout, J., & Bechara, A. (2005). Using cognitive models to map relations between neuropsychological disorders and human decision-making deficits. Psychological Science, 16, 973–978.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔