Abstract
HIGHLIGHTS We use a simple gambles design in an fMRI study to compare two conditions: ambiguity and conflict.Participants were more conflict averse than ambiguity averse.Ambiguity aversion did not correlate with conflict aversion.Activation in the medial prefrontal cortex correlated with ambiguity level and ambiguity aversion.Activation in the ventral striatum correlated with conflict level and conflict aversion.Studies of decision making under uncertainty generally focus on imprecise information about outcome probabilities (“ambiguity”). It is not clear, however, whether conflicting information about outcome probabilities affects decision making in the same manner as ambiguity does. Here we combine functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and a simple gamble design to study this question. In this design the levels of ambiguity and conflict are parametrically varied, and ambiguity and conflict gambles are matched on expected value. Behaviorally, participants avoided conflict more than ambiguity, and attitudes toward ambiguity and conflict did not correlate across participants. Neurally, regional brain activation was differentially modulated by ambiguity level and aversion to ambiguity and by conflict level and aversion to conflict. Activation in the medial prefrontal cortex was correlated with the level of ambiguity and with ambiguity aversion, whereas activation in the ventral striatum was correlated with the level of conflict and with conflict aversion. These novel results indicate that decision makers process imprecise and conflicting information differently, a finding that has important implications for basic and clinical research.
Highlights
Our ability to make effective decisions is considerably affected by the quality of information we receive
To Huettel et al (2006) we find that the ambiguity effect in the right posterior inferior frontal sulcus correlates positively with behavioral measures of ambiguity aversion
To test the valuation hypothesis, we looked at correlations between the activity in the vmPFC and the subjective value of the chosen option under ambiguity and under conflict
Summary
Our ability to make effective decisions is considerably affected by the quality of information we receive. You are joined by two friends, both experienced race watchers, with inside information about the race horses. You ask for your friends’ advice in selecting one of these horses to bet on. One of your friends is very confident that horse A’s odds are twice as high as those of horse B, while your other friend strongly disagrees and insists that he has solid evidence supporting the exact opposite. If you trust both of your friends, how would you pick one of the horses over the other one? Compare this scenario with a different one, in which your friends agree that the likelihoods of both horses to win are unclear. The goal of this paper is to compare how people make decisions under these two types of uncertainty, both behaviorally and neurally
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have