Sun, Nov 24, 2024
| فارسی
Volume 6, Issue 3 And 4 (Autumn & Winter 2004)
Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2004, 6(3 And 4): 17-27 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ekhtiar H, Behzadi A, Jannati A, mokri A. Frequency of Losing or The Sum Lost: Which One Makes Us More Negative?. Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2004; 6 (3 and 4) :17-27
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-86-en.html
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-86-en.html
Abstract: (2449 Views)
Objective: In recent years, determining the extent to which the factors such as the amount of reward or punishment, their frequency, delay in delivery, and the odds of reward or punishment can affect riskful decision making have been a subject of interest 0 the cognitive science researchers. The present study assessed the effect of the amount and frequency of win/lose on subjects.
Method: For this cross-sectional/analytical study, first, 110 male first-grade high school students were assessed using the simplified Persian version of the Iowa Gabling task, in 2 separate groups.
Results: Findings from both steps of the task showed the subjects preferred cards Band D (losing less frequently, larger sums) (in the original having average choices of30. 10 and 31. 90 out of 100 choices for each person) to cards A and C (losing more frequently, smaller sums) (original test average choices of 18.14 and 19.86);in a way that the total score, which indicates the subject's inclination toward advantageous cards (D and C) as compared to disadvantageous cards (A and B), was reduced to 3.5. This also held true for the average selection time from the deck; the subjects used the Band D decks faster than the A and C decks.
Conclusion: The findings of this study showed the superiority of the frequency of losing over the sums lost; that is, the studied subjects did not discriminate between the cards that lost different sums at similar frequencies, but with the cards that lost similar sums at different frequencies (low, high) they were' significantly inclined to less frequently losing cards. This finding is different from other studies, implying different strategies in riskful decision making.
Method: For this cross-sectional/analytical study, first, 110 male first-grade high school students were assessed using the simplified Persian version of the Iowa Gabling task, in 2 separate groups.
Results: Findings from both steps of the task showed the subjects preferred cards Band D (losing less frequently, larger sums) (in the original having average choices of30. 10 and 31. 90 out of 100 choices for each person) to cards A and C (losing more frequently, smaller sums) (original test average choices of 18.14 and 19.86);in a way that the total score, which indicates the subject's inclination toward advantageous cards (D and C) as compared to disadvantageous cards (A and B), was reduced to 3.5. This also held true for the average selection time from the deck; the subjects used the Band D decks faster than the A and C decks.
Conclusion: The findings of this study showed the superiority of the frequency of losing over the sums lost; that is, the studied subjects did not discriminate between the cards that lost different sums at similar frequencies, but with the cards that lost similar sums at different frequencies (low, high) they were' significantly inclined to less frequently losing cards. This finding is different from other studies, implying different strategies in riskful decision making.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2017/05/9 | Accepted: 2004/07/22 | Published: 2004/09/22
Received: 2017/05/9 | Accepted: 2004/07/22 | Published: 2004/09/22
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
