Differences in Cold and Hot Decision-Making between Gambling and Other Addictions

Author:

Meca Sara1,Molins Francisco1ORCID,Puigcerver Maragda1,Serrano Miguel Ángel1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychobiology, Universitat de València, Avenida Blasco Ibañez, 21, 46010 Valencia, Spain

Abstract

Behavioral and biological addictions can impair decision-making processes, mainly by means of a dysfunction in brain regions associated with reward and frontal areas that may lead to disadvantageous choices. Understanding these differences helps establish appropriate terminology and enhances our ability to recognize, prevent, and treat these disorders effectively. Thus, while behavioral and biological addictions share some common elements, their underlying mechanisms and impact on decision-making vary significantly. Moreover, decision-making can be measured through questionnaires (stable or “cold” measures) or dynamic tasks (hot decisions) such as the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), which can reflect different dimensions of this process. The aim of this study was to compare decision-making from different perspectives—stable and dynamic measures—in patients with gambling addiction (GA) (n = 42) and patients with biological addictions (BA) (n = 43). Decision-making was assessed using GDMS (Decisional Styles) and the LCT (Loss Aversion), as cold decision-making measures, as well as a hot or situational task called the IGT (Iowa Gambling Task). The results revealed that GA patients exhibited lower rational style scores compared to BA patients. Additionally, GA patients showed greater loss aversion according to the LCT questionnaire. On the other hand, when analyzing the IGT results, no differences were observed between groups in the overall IG index, learning curves, or the loss aversion parameter. However, GA patients showed higher sensitivity to feedback and less consistency in their decisions. These findings highlight the differences between different types of addictions and highlight the importance of considering the type of measure used to evaluate decision-making.

Publisher

MDPI AG

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3