Misestimating risk could lead to disadvantaged choices such as initiation of drug use (or gambling) and transition to regular drug use (or gambling). Although the normative theory in decision-making under risks assumes that people typically take the probability-weighted expectation over possible utilities, experimental studies of choices among risks suggest that outcome probabilities are transformed nonlinearly into subjective decision weights by a nonlinear weighting function that overweights low probabilities and underweights high probabilities. Recent studies have revealed the neurocognitive mechanism of decision-making under risk. However, the role of modulatory neurotransmission in this process remains unclear. Using positron emission tomography, we directly investigated whether dopamine D 1 and D 2 receptors in the brain are associated with transformation of probabilities into decision weights in healthy volunteers. The binding of striatal D 1 receptors is negatively correlated with the degree of nonlinearity of weighting function. Individuals with lower striatal D 1 receptor density showed more pronounced overestimation of low probabilities and underestimation of high probabilities. This finding should contribute to a better understanding of the molecular mechanism of risky choice, and extreme or impaired decisionmaking observed in drug and gambling addiction.
How does one deal with unfair behaviors? This subject has long been investigated by various disciplines including philosophy, psychology, economics, and biology. However, our reactions to unfairness differ from one individual to another. Experimental economics studies using the ultimatum game (UG), in which players must decide whether to accept or reject fair or unfair offers, have also shown that there are substantial individual differences in reaction to unfairness. However, little is known about psychological as well as neurobiological mechanisms of this observation. We combined a molecular imaging technique, an economics game, and a personality inventory to elucidate the neurobiological mechanism of heterogeneous reactions to unfairness. Contrary to the common belief that aggressive personalities (impulsivity or hostility) are related to the high rejection rate of unfair offers in UG, we found that individuals with apparently peaceful personalities (straightforwardness and trust) rejected more often and were engaged in personally costly forms of retaliation. Furthermore, individuals with a low level of serotonin transporters in the dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) are honest and trustful, and thus cannot tolerate unfairness, being candid in expressing their frustrations. In other words, higher central serotonin transmission might allow us to behave adroitly and opportunistically, being good at playing games while pursuing self-interest. We provide unique neurobiological evidence to account for individual differences of reaction to unfairness.positron emission tomography | decision-making | fairness
Internet surveys are currently used in many academic and marketing research fields. However, the results for these surveys occasionally show traces of response bias. In our study, we analyzed how response bias appears in lengthy preference judgments. 1042 respondents participated in lengthy sequential preference judgments. Three stimuli series were used: scene pictures, Attneave nonsense shapes, and point-symmetric figures. One hundred stimuli were selected for each series and individually displayed on a computer screen, with presentation order randomized for each respondent. Respondents were then asked to rate their degree of preference for each stimulus. Mean preference scores increased over the first 10-20 trials, then, gradually decreased from the middle to the last trial. Furthermore, participants tended to produce the maximum and minimum score during early trials. These results demonstrated that response bias can be a function of presentation order.Communicated by Kazuhisa Takemura.Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.