There are many ways to measure how people manage risk when they make decisions. A standard approach is to measure risk propensity using self-report questionnaires. An alternative approach is to use decision-making tasks that involve risk and uncertainty, and apply cognitive models of task behavior to infer parameters that measure people’s risk propensity. We report the results of a within-participants experiment that used three questionnaires and four decision-making tasks. The questionnaires are the Risk Propensity Scale, the Risk Taking Index, and the DomainSpecific Risk Taking Scale. The decision-making tasks are the Balloon Analogue Risk Task, the preferential choice gambling task, the optimal stopping problem, and the bandit problem. We analyze the relationships between the risk measures and cognitive parameters using Bayesian inferences about the patterns of correlation, and using a novel cognitive latent variable modeling approach. The results show that people’s risk propensity is generally consistent within different conditions for each of the decision-making tasks. There is, however, little evidence that the way people manage risk generalizes across the tasks, or that it corresponds to the questionnaire measures.

Recent evidence suggests that the motor system may have a facilitatory role in speech perception during noisy listening conditions. Studies clearly show an association between activity in auditory and motor speech systems, but also hint at a causal role for the motor system in noisy speech perception. However, in the most compelling "causal" studies performance was only measured at a single signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). If listening conditions must be noisy to invoke causal motor involvement, then effects will be contingent on the SNR at which they are tested. We used articulatory suppression to disrupt motor-speech areas while measuring phonemic identification across a range of SNRs. As controls, we also measured phoneme identification during passive listening, mandible gesturing, and foot-tapping conditions. Two-parameter (threshold, slope) psychometric functions were fit to the data in each condition. Our findings indicate: (1) no effect of experimental task on psychometric function slopes; (2) a small effect of articulatory suppression, in particular, on psychometric function thresholds. The size of the latter effect was 1 dB (~5% correct) on average, suggesting, at best, a minor modulatory role of the speech motor system in perception.

No abstract

No abstract