Display options
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2015 May 28;6:717. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00717. eCollection 2015.

Greater decision-making competence is associated with greater expected-value sensitivity, but not overall risk taking: an examination of concurrent validity.

Frontiers in psychology

Andrew M Parker, Joshua A Weller

Affiliations

  1. RAND Corporation Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  2. School of Psychological Science, Oregon State University Corvallis, OR, USA ; Decision Research Eugene, OR, USA.

PMID: 26074857 PMCID: PMC4446538 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00717

Abstract

Decision-making competence reflects individual differences in the susceptibility to committing decision-making errors, measured using tasks common from behavioral decision research (e.g., framing effects, under/overconfidence, following decision rules). Prior research demonstrates that those with higher decision-making competence report lower incidence of health-risking and antisocial behaviors, but there has been less focus on intermediate processes that may impact real-world decisions, and, in particular, those implicated by normative models. Here we test the associations between measures of youth decision-making competence (Y-DMC) and one such process, the degree to which individuals make choices consistent with maximizing expected value (EV). Using a task involving hypothetical gambles, we find that greater EV sensitivity is associated with greater Y-DMC. Higher Y-DMC scores are associated with (a) choosing risky options when EV favors those options and (b) avoiding risky options when EV favors a certain option. This relationship is stronger for gambles that involved potential losses. The results suggest that Y-DMC captures decision processes consistent with standard normative evaluations of risky decisions.

Keywords: competence; decision making; expected value sensitivity; individual differences; risky choice

References

  1. Child Maltreat. 2013 Aug;18(3):184-94 - PubMed
  2. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1999 Sep;79(3):216-247 - PubMed
  3. Psychol Bull. 2013 Mar;139(2):497-518 - PubMed
  4. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 May;92(5):938-56 - PubMed
  5. Neuron. 2005 Sep 1;47(5):763-70 - PubMed
  6. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e45775 - PubMed
  7. Neuroimage. 2007 Sep 1;37(3):1017-31 - PubMed
  8. Psychol Aging. 2014 Jun;29(2):271-83 - PubMed
  9. Psychol Sci. 2007 Nov;18(11):958-64 - PubMed
  10. Dev Psychopathol. 2015 May;27(2):535-51 - PubMed
  11. Cereb Cortex. 2009 May;19(5):1019-27 - PubMed
  12. Psychol Aging. 2010 Jun;25(2):262-70 - PubMed
  13. Intelligence. 2014 May-June;44:112-119 - PubMed
  14. Science. 2002 Mar 22;295(5563):2279-82 - PubMed
  15. Psychol Bull. 1955 Jul;52(4):281-302 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2014;36(6):588-95 - PubMed
  17. Front Psychol. 2015 May 12;6:540 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support