Cognitive Judgment Bias Interacts with Risk Based Decision Making and Sensitivity to Dopaminergic Challenge in Male Rats.

Robert Drozd,Jan Rodriguez Parkitna,Przemyslaw E Cieslak,Michal Rychlik,Rafal Rygula

doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00163

Robert Drozd, Jan Rodriguez Parkitna + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00163

Copy DOI

Abstract

Although the cognitive theory has implicated judgment bias in various psychopathologies, its role in decision making under risk remains relatively unexplored. In the present study, we assessed the effects of cognitive judgment bias on risky choices in rats. First, we trained and tested the animals on the rat version of the probability-discounting (PD) task. During discrete trials, the rats chose between two levers; a press on the “small/certain” lever always resulted in the delivery of one reward pellet, whereas a press on the “large/risky” lever resulted in the delivery of four pellets. However, the probability of receiving a reward from the “large/risky” lever gradually decreased over the four trial blocks. Subsequently, the rats were re-trained and evaluated on a series of ambiguous-cue interpretation (ACI) tests, which permitted their classification according to the display of “optimistic” or “pessimistic” traits. Because dopamine (DA) has been implicated in both: risky choices and optimism, in the last experiment, we compared the reactivity of the dopaminergic system in the “optimistic” and “pessimistic” animals using the apomorphine (APO; 2 mg/kg s.c.) sensitivity test. We demonstrated that as risk increased, the proportion of risky lever choices decreased significantly slower in “optimists” compared with “pessimists” and that these differences between the two groups of rats were associated with different levels of dopaminergic system reactivity. Our findings suggest that cognitive judgment bias, risky decision-making and DA are linked, and they provide a foundation for further investigation of the behavioral traits and cognitive processes that influence risky choices in animal models.

Highlights

Since Chevelier de Mere (1607–1684) asked Blaise Pascal for help with identifying a mathematical answer for why he consistently lost money playing a certain game of dice, intellectuals, economists and psychologists have studied how different aspects of human cognition influence risk-related decision making
To compare the risk-taking behaviors between the ‘‘optimistic’’ and ‘‘pessimistic’’ animals, after the PD testing, the rats were trained for the ambiguous-cue interpretation (ACI) paradigm and on the basis of the cognitive bias screening (CBS) procedure, classified as ‘‘optimistic’’ or ‘‘pessimistic’’
The results of our study demonstrated that in rats, ‘‘optimistic’ judgment bias was associated with an increased propensity to make a risky choice, but only when the level of risk was high and not when it was low or intermediate

Summary

Introduction

Since Chevelier de Mere (1607–1684) asked Blaise Pascal for help with identifying a mathematical answer for why he consistently lost money playing a certain game of dice, intellectuals, economists and psychologists have studied how different aspects of human cognition influence risk-related decision making. Cognitive biases and distortions, such as unrealistic optimism and/or pessimism, have been proposed to play crucial roles in risky decision making and to cause the establishment and maintenance of mental disorders such as pathological gambling. The psychological literature has provided a growing body of evidence that optimism is a highly advantageous trait that is linked to enhanced performance in the domains of academics (Chang and Bridewell, 1998; Montgomery et al, 2003), athletics (Gould et al, 2002; Gordon, 2008), health (Scheier and Carver, 1987; Brydon et al, 2009) and work (Seligman and Schulman, 1986; Kluemper et al, 2009). Optimists have been shown to engage more in treatment programs (e.g., psychotherapy, nutrition and education), and consistent with their greater engagement in other high-priority tasks (Geers et al, 2009; Carver and Scheier, 2014), optimistic individuals are known to work harder at maintaining their relationships (Segerstrom, 2007; Rand, 2009)

Methods

Results

Conclusion