Do adolescents always take more risks than adults? A within-subjects developmental study of context effects on decision making and processing.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
03
11
2020
accepted:
09
07
2021
entrez:
2
8
2021
pubmed:
3
8
2021
medline:
25
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Adolescents take more risks than adults in the real world, but laboratory experiments do not consistently demonstrate this pattern. In the current study, we examine the possibility that age differences in decision making vary as a function of the nature of the task (e.g., how information about risk is learned) and contextual features of choices (e.g., the relative favorability of choice outcomes), due to age differences in psychological constructs and physiological processes related to choice (e.g., weighting of rare probabilities, sensitivity to expected value, sampling, pupil dilation). Adolescents and adults made the same 24 choices between risky and safe options twice: once based on descriptions of each option, and once based on experience gained from sampling the options repeatedly. We systematically varied contextual features of options, facilitating a fine-grained analysis of age differences in response to these features. Eye-tracking and experience-sampling measures allowed tests of age differences in predecisional processes. Results in adolescent and adult participants were similar in several respects, including mean risk-taking rates and eye-gaze patterns. However, adolescents' and adults' choice behavior and process measures varied as a function of decision context. Surprisingly, age differences were most pronounced in description, with only marginal differences in experience. Results suggest that probability weighting, expected-value sensitivity, experience sampling and pupil dilation patterns may change with age. Overall, results are consistent with the notion that adolescents are more prone than adults to take risks when faced with unlikely but costly negative outcomes, and broadly point to complex interactions between multiple psychological constructs that develop across adolescence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34339433
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255102
pii: PONE-D-20-34646
pmc: PMC8328301
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0255102Subventions
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : F32 DA047047
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012 Jun;7(5):557-67
pubmed: 22563008
Psychol Bull. 2015 Jan;141(1):48-84
pubmed: 25365761
Psychol Rev. 2004 Apr;111(2):430-45
pubmed: 15065916
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2019 Feb 18;374(1766):20180133
pubmed: 30966918
Dev Rev. 2018 Mar;47:23-43
pubmed: 29527087
Psychol Bull. 2018 Feb;144(2):140-176
pubmed: 29239630
J Exp Child Psychol. 2012 Oct;113(2):286-94
pubmed: 22727674
Science. 1997 Feb 28;275(5304):1293-5
pubmed: 9036851
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 Jul;14(7):513-8
pubmed: 23756633
J Behav Decis Mak. 2016 Apr-Jul;29(2-3):116-136
pubmed: 27522985
Cogn Dev. 2015 Oct-Dec;36:20-30
pubmed: 26388664
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2009 Mar;10(3):211-23
pubmed: 19190638
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May;35(3):709-30
pubmed: 19379045
Nat Commun. 2017 Mar 03;8:14637
pubmed: 28256514
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2015 Jun;15(2):395-415
pubmed: 25673005
Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Jan;15(1):11-9
pubmed: 21130018
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Oct 15;110(42):17143-8
pubmed: 24082105
Psychol Sci. 2010 Dec;21(12):1787-92
pubmed: 20974711
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Apr;144(2):366-73
pubmed: 25602754
Dev Psychol. 2012 Jan;48(1):192-203
pubmed: 21967563
Nat Neurosci. 2010 Oct;13(10):1292-8
pubmed: 20835253
Sci Rep. 2017 Jan 18;7:40962
pubmed: 28098227
Neuron. 2009 May 28;62(4):593-602
pubmed: 19477159
Front Psychol. 2014 Aug 20;5:915
pubmed: 25191295
Child Neuropsychol. 2011;17(4):400-11
pubmed: 21390919
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 16;109(42):17135-40
pubmed: 23027965
Cognition. 2012 Sep;124(3):334-42
pubmed: 22763337
J Neurosci. 2015 Jan 28;35(4):1549-60
pubmed: 25632132
Psychol Sci. 2004 Aug;15(8):534-9
pubmed: 15270998
Neuron. 2016 Jan 6;89(1):221-34
pubmed: 26711118
Nat Neurosci. 2003 Dec;6(12):1317-22
pubmed: 14608360
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019 Dec;148(12):2207-2217
pubmed: 31033320
Dev Sci. 2017 May;20(3):
pubmed: 27061442
Cognition. 1994 Apr-Jun;50(1-3):7-15
pubmed: 8039375
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Jun;25:69-91
pubmed: 27908561
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Sep;144(1):190-206
pubmed: 23845447
Neuroimage. 2011 Jan 15;54(2):1442-54
pubmed: 20807576
Child Dev Perspect. 2019 Mar;13(1):48-52
pubmed: 30774707
Dev Psychol. 2010 Jan;46(1):193-207
pubmed: 20053017
Cogn Dev. 2010 Apr;25(2):183-196
pubmed: 20689728
Curr Neuropharmacol. 2008 Sep;6(3):235-53
pubmed: 19506723
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jan 28;111(4):1646-51
pubmed: 24474790
Dev Psychol. 2018 Apr;54(4):689-702
pubmed: 29154644
MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018 Jun 15;67(8):1-114
pubmed: 29902162
J Cogn Neurosci. 2013 Feb;25(2):284-96
pubmed: 23163417
Dev Psychobiol. 2012 May;54(4):433-40
pubmed: 22012864
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:295-319
pubmed: 25089362
Prog Brain Res. 2013;202:55-71
pubmed: 23317826
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2013 Jan;3:72-83
pubmed: 23245222
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Oct;27:91-98
pubmed: 28869843