• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>IEEE International Conference on Smart City >Portfolio Choice vs. Single Choice: Neural Differences in Cognitive Control
【24h】

Portfolio Choice vs. Single Choice: Neural Differences in Cognitive Control

机译：投资组合选择与单项选择：认知控制中的神经差异

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In experimental economics, an important issue for obtaining reliable behavioral results is the design of payoff procedures for giving incentives to the subjects. One common payoff procedure in multiple lottery choice tasks is the random payoff mechanism. This mechanism provides incentives for a truthful response in every single choice task since every decision should be treated as independent from other decisions. A second, often used payoff procedure is to realize all decision. Since all decisions are determining the final reward, subjects are not incentivized to treat their decisions independently. The difference in risk behavior between both payoff procedures is known as the portfolio effect. In our study, we address the question how these two payoff mechanisms differ in their evaluation process since the portfolio effect is caused by a divergence in the independent valuation of a choice task. Evaluation processes occur before observable behavior takes place and can be assigned to cognitive control mechanisms. In order to reveal such processes, we performed an EEG paradigm comprising two sessions with an identical lottery choice task design, but different payoff procedures. We focused on the stimulus-locked N200 component, an event-related potential closely related to cognitive control processes. Our behavioral data show differences between both payoff mechanisms which can be assigned to a portfolio effect. The analysis of the event-related potentials reveals a characteristic pattern of the N200 amplitude between choices inside and outside an area of indifference. Choices inside the indifference area evoke higher N200 amplitudes which can be attributed to a higher action control conflict when subjects are indecisive. Furthermore, a higher N200 amplitude is present for risky outside the indifference area choices when all decision are paid out. This is contrary to the random payoff mechanism in which an increased N200 is absent. This implies that more resources ar- allocated in a portfolio choice task when lotteries are chosen. Risky portfolio choices seem to involve additional choice criteria such as the relevance of previous decisions. As a consequence, a potential portfolio effect has to be related to a non-independent choice task evaluation solely in risky portfolio choices.
机译：在实验经济学中，获得可靠的行为结果的重要问题是为受试者提供激励的支付程序的设计。多个彩票选择任务中的一个常见收益程序是随机收益机制。这种机制在每一个选择任务中都提供了真实的反应，因为每个决定都应该被视为独立于其他决定。第二个，经常使用的收益程序是实现所有决定。由于所有决策都是确定最终奖励，因此受试者并未独立地对待其决策。两次回报程序之间的风险行为差异被称为投资组合效应。在我们的研究中，我们解决了这两个后两项支付机制在评估过程中如何在评估过程中不同，因为组合效应是由独立估值选择任务的差异引起的。评估过程发生在可观察到的行为之前，并且可以分配给认知控制机制。为了揭示此类过程，我们执行了一个eeg范例，包括两个会话，具有相同的彩票选择任务设计，但不同的收益程序。我们专注于刺激锁定的N200组件，与认知控制过程密切相关的事件相关的潜力。我们的行为数据显示了可以分配给投资组合效果的支付机制之间的差异。对事件相关电位的分析揭示了在漠不关系区域内外选择之间的N200振幅的特征模式。在漠不关心区域内的选择唤起了更高的N200幅度，当受试者犹豫不决时，可以归因于更高的动作控制冲突。此外，在支付所有决定的情况下，存在较高的N200幅度，用于在漠不关心的区域选择之外的风险。这与随机支付机制违背了不存在的N200。 This implies that more resources ar- allocated in a portfolio choice task when lotteries are chosen.危险的投资组合选择似乎涉及其他选择标准，例如先前决定的相关性。因此，潜在的投资组合效应仅与非独立选择任务评估有关，这些效果完全是在风险的组合选择中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号