爱荷华州赌博任务游戏或通过版本的重测可靠性。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Jeremy M Haynes, Nathaniel Haines, Holly Sullivan-Toole, Thomas M Olino
{"title":"爱荷华州赌博任务游戏或通过版本的重测可靠性。","authors":"Jeremy M Haynes, Nathaniel Haines, Holly Sullivan-Toole, Thomas M Olino","doi":"10.3758/s13415-024-01197-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is used to assess decision-making in clinical populations. The original IGT does not disambiguate reward and punishment learning; however, an adaptation of the task, the \"play-or-pass\" IGT, was developed to better distinguish between reward and punishment learning. We evaluated the test-retest reliability of measures of reward and punishment learning from the play-or-pass IGT and examined associations with self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Participants completed the task across two sessions, and we calculated mean-level differences and rank-order stability of behavioral measures across the two sessions using traditional scoring, involving session-wide choice proportions, and computational modeling, involving estimates of different aspects of trial-level learning. Measures using both approaches were reliable; however, computational modeling provided more insights regarding between-session changes in performance, and how performance related to self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Our results show promise in using the play-or-pass IGT to assess decision-making; however, further work is still necessary to validate the play-or-pass IGT.</p>","PeriodicalId":50672,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"740-754"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test-retest reliability of the play-or-pass version of the Iowa Gambling Task.\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy M Haynes, Nathaniel Haines, Holly Sullivan-Toole, Thomas M Olino\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13415-024-01197-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is used to assess decision-making in clinical populations. The original IGT does not disambiguate reward and punishment learning; however, an adaptation of the task, the \\\"play-or-pass\\\" IGT, was developed to better distinguish between reward and punishment learning. We evaluated the test-retest reliability of measures of reward and punishment learning from the play-or-pass IGT and examined associations with self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Participants completed the task across two sessions, and we calculated mean-level differences and rank-order stability of behavioral measures across the two sessions using traditional scoring, involving session-wide choice proportions, and computational modeling, involving estimates of different aspects of trial-level learning. Measures using both approaches were reliable; however, computational modeling provided more insights regarding between-session changes in performance, and how performance related to self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Our results show promise in using the play-or-pass IGT to assess decision-making; however, further work is still necessary to validate the play-or-pass IGT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"740-754\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636993/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01197-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01197-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

爱荷华赌博任务(IGT)用于评估临床人群的决策能力。原始的 IGT 无法区分奖励和惩罚学习;然而,为了更好地区分奖励和惩罚学习,我们对该任务进行了改编,开发出了 "玩或过 "IGT。我们评估了 "玩或过 "IGT 中奖惩学习测量的重测可靠性,并研究了其与自我报告的奖惩敏感性测量和内化症状之间的关联。受试者分两次完成任务,我们采用传统的计分法(涉及整个阶段的选择比例)和计算模型法(涉及对试验水平学习不同方面的估计)计算了两次任务中行为测量的平均水平差异和秩序稳定性。使用这两种方法进行的测量都是可靠的;但是,计算建模提供了更多关于不同时段表现变化的见解,以及表现与自我报告的奖惩敏感性和内化症状测量之间的关系。我们的研究结果表明,使用 "游戏或通过 IGT "来评估决策是有希望的;但是,仍有必要开展进一步的工作来验证 "游戏或通过 IGT"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Test-retest reliability of the play-or-pass version of the Iowa Gambling Task.

Test-retest reliability of the play-or-pass version of the Iowa Gambling Task.

The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is used to assess decision-making in clinical populations. The original IGT does not disambiguate reward and punishment learning; however, an adaptation of the task, the "play-or-pass" IGT, was developed to better distinguish between reward and punishment learning. We evaluated the test-retest reliability of measures of reward and punishment learning from the play-or-pass IGT and examined associations with self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Participants completed the task across two sessions, and we calculated mean-level differences and rank-order stability of behavioral measures across the two sessions using traditional scoring, involving session-wide choice proportions, and computational modeling, involving estimates of different aspects of trial-level learning. Measures using both approaches were reliable; however, computational modeling provided more insights regarding between-session changes in performance, and how performance related to self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Our results show promise in using the play-or-pass IGT to assess decision-making; however, further work is still necessary to validate the play-or-pass IGT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.40%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience (CABN) offers theoretical, review, and primary research articles on behavior and brain processes in humans. Coverage includes normal function as well as patients with injuries or processes that influence brain function: neurological disorders, including both healthy and disordered aging; and psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and depression. CABN is the leading vehicle for strongly psychologically motivated studies of brain–behavior relationships, through the presentation of papers that integrate psychological theory and the conduct and interpretation of the neuroscientific data. The range of topics includes perception, attention, memory, language, problem solving, reasoning, and decision-making; emotional processes, motivation, reward prediction, and affective states; and individual differences in relevant domains, including personality. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience is a publication of the Psychonomic Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信