Abstract
To systematically examine the role of anticipatory skin conductance responses (aSCRs) in predicting Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) performance. Secondly, to assess the quality of aSCR evidence for the Somatic Marker Hypothesis (SMH) during the IGT. Finally, to evaluate the reliability of current psychophysiological measurements on the IGT. Electronic databases, journals and reference lists were examined for inclusion. Data were extracted by two reviewers and validated by another reviewer, using a standardised extraction sheet along with a quality assessment. Two meta-analyses of aSCR measures were conducted to test the relationship between overall aSCR and IGT performance, and differences in aSCR between advantageous and disadvantageous decks. Twenty studies were included in this review. Quality assessment revealed that five studies did not measure anticipatory responses, and few stated they followed standard IGT and/or psychophysiological procedures. The first meta-analysis of 15 studies revealed a significant, small-to-medium relationship between aSCR and IGT performance (r= .22). The second meta-analysis of eight studies revealed a significant, small difference in aSCR between the advantageous and disadvantageous decks (r= .10); however, publication bias is likely to be an issue. Meta-analyses revealed aSCR evidence supporting the SMH. However, inconsistencies in the IGT and psychophysiological methods, along with publication bias, cast doubt on these effects. It is recommended that future tests of the SMH use a range of psychophysiological measures, a standardised IGT protocol, and discriminate between advantageous and disadvantageous decks.
Highlights
Learning and decision making in uncertain or ambiguous situations is an important feature of everyday life
The results indicated that anticipatory skin conductance responses (aSCRs) may be reliable in predicting Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) performance
The current review systematically examines two hypotheses related to psychophysiological evidence of aSCR and IGT performance in healthy individuals using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA; Moher et al, 2009)
Summary
Learning and decision making in uncertain or ambiguous situations is an important feature of everyday life. Blanchette and Richards (2010) argue that the decision-making process involves several stages: extracting meaning from ambiguous information in order to construct a mental representation (interpretation process); evaluating the evidence, estimating the value and likelihood of the occurrence of differing outcomes (judgement); and drawing inferences and selecting from the available options (choice). According to Damasio (1994), in situations of ambiguity and uncertainty, these somatic markers create an emotional signal about the “goodness” or “badness” of choices. Those options that are marked as good are considered for selection. It is assumed that somatic markers pre-empt or guide cognitive, reason-based choice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
