Master of Science / Department of Psychological Sciences / Michael Young / When making decisions, the probability and magnitude of errors can play a major role in changing preferences. Electroencephalography (EEG) research examining the error-related negativity (ERN) and the associated feedback-related negativity (FRN) has indicated that the amplitude of each component may predict subsequent behavioral change. The current study used a version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) that involves outcomes that are dynamically changing over time. As the balloon grows, more points are available but the probability of the balloon popping (netting zero points) is higher; the participant decides when to stop the balloon’s expansion to maximize points. The BART was adapted to facilitate the study of the FRN in dynamic environments. The purpose of Experiment 1 was to determine the effect of error magnitude on FRN amplitude during popped (incorrect) trials, whereas Experiment 2 was aimed at determining the effect of error magnitude on FRN amplitude during cashed-in (correct) trials. It was hypothesized that larger errors (i.e., the balloon popping after waiting a long time to cash-in) would result in a larger FRN than smaller errors. In Experiment 1, error magnitude did not contribute to the amplitude of the FRN. In Experiment 2, the masked points possible condition was a replication of Experiment 1. In the unmasked points possible condition, the number of points that could have been earned for each balloon was presented before participants found out how many points were earned. It was expected that there would be a larger FRN magnitude after cashed-in trials in the unmasked points possible condition compared to the masked points possible condition based on the magnitude of the error. In Experiment 2, the amplitude of the FRN was affected by the magnitude of the error on cashed-in trials in the unmasked condition, but not the masked condition. These results are seemingly at odds, and cannot be assimilated into any currently extant model of the FRN. An explanation relying on the motivational importance of errors is discussed.

Laboratory-based tasks of impulsivity and related constructs can be useful in predicting alcohol use. Performance on these tasks is generally assumed to reflect traits that remain stable across situations. However, several studies have indicated that manipulations of state-like variables (e.g., mood or stress) can influence levels of impulsivity demonstrated on the tasks. Furthermore, environmental context (in the form of physical setting, or contextual cues) has a demonstrable effect on tasks relevant to alcohol-related risky behaviors (e.g., ad lib drinking tasks). Importantly, this effect of context on behavior is dependent on the individual's alcohol expectancies. It is unknown, however, whether alcohol-related cues would lead to greater risk taking on a commonly used laboratory-based risk task, and whether this effect would be moderated by alcohol expectancies. These hypotheses were tested in a sample of undergraduate social drinkers. Results indicated that participants who viewed an alcohol prime did not perform significantly more riskily on the Balloon Analogue Risk Task than those who viewed a non-alcohol prime. While mean levels of risk taking were higher following the alcohol prime, the difference did not approach significance; the priming condition-by-expectancy interaction was also not significant.

Impulsivity-related traits explain a significant and meaningful level of variance in the prediction of drinking behavior. Previous research has demonstrated that although risk taking propensity has been conceptualized as a "trait-like" construct, there are contextual and situational factors that affect an individual's likelihood of engaging in risk taking behavior, including drinking behavior. Despite the well-established relationship between alcohol use and risk behavior (e.g., risky sexual behavior, physical assault, etc.), it is unclear how alcohol-related context influences risk taking on a computerized behavioral task. Grounded in alcohol expectancy theory (which holds that information processing about the rewarding effects of alcohol mediates the influences of different affective processes on drinking-related behavior), the present study—using online-based assessments—examined whether implicitly priming undergraduate social-drinking participants with alcohol-related stimuli (images and arousing expectancy words) would lead to greater risk taking and disinhibition on computerized tasks. Results were complicated by baseline group differences in drinking, expectancies, and the day of the week in which participants completed the task; regardless, the central hypothesis was not supported, as participants exposed to alcohol images and expectancy words were not significantly riskier on the BART or more impulsive on the Go/No-Go than participants exposed to neutral images and words. Exploratory analyses indicated that participants who completed the tasks on days associated with drinking (Thursdays through Saturdays) were significantly riskier than participants who completed the tasks on other days, and that this effect was the strongest when participants were exposed to alcohol primes. While consistent with the context sensitivity of alcohol cognitions and risk taking, the lack of random assignment to day of the week precludes causal interpretation. Nonetheless, the results indicate that research on the assessment of risk taking in a naturalistic context (e.g., through ecological momentary assessment) is warranted.

No description available.