Sensitivity to sequential regularities in risky decision making

Abstract

Abstract Probabilistic sequence learning involves a set of robust mechanisms that enable the extraction of statistical patterns embedded in the environment. It contributes to different perceptual and cognitive processes as well as to effective behavior adaptation, which is a crucial aspect of decision making. Although previous research attempted to model reinforcement learning and reward sensitivity in different risky decision-making paradigms, the basic mechanism of the sensitivity to statistical regularities has not been anchored to external tasks. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the statistical learning mechanism underlying individual differences in risky decision making. To reach this goal, we tested whether implicit probabilistic sequence learning and risky decision making share common variance. To have a more complex characterization of individual differences in risky decision making, hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted on performance data obtained in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) in a large sample of healthy young adults. Implicit probabilistic sequence learning was measured by the Alternating Serial Reaction Time (ASRT) task. According to the results, a four-cluster structure was identified involving average risk-taking, slowly responding, risk-taker, and risk-averse groups of participants, respectively. While the entire sample showed significant learning on the ASRT task, we found greater sensitivity to statistical regularities in the risk-taker and risk-averse groups than in participants with average risk-taking. These findings revealed common mechanisms in risky decision making and implicit probabilistic sequence learning and an adaptive aspect of higher risk taking on the BART. Our results could help to clarify the neurocognitive complexity of decision making and its individual differences.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 0 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.