HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Windmann, S. Articles by Vaitl, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Windmann, S. Articles by Vaitl, D.

On Framing Effects in Decision Making: Linking Lateral versus Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Activation to Choice Outcome Processing

¹ University of Plymouth, United Kingdom, ² University of Bochum, Germany, ³ Institute of Psychology, University of Frankfurt, Germany, ⁴ University of Giessen, Germany

Reprint requests should be sent to Sabine Windmann, Institute of Psychology, Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe University Frankfurt, Mertonstr. 17, 60054 Frankfurt/Main, Germany, or via e-mail: SWindmann{at}psych.uni-frankfurt.de.

Two correlates of outcome processing in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) have been proposed in the literature: One hypothesis suggests that the lateral/medial division relates to representation of outcome valence (negative vs. positive), and the other suggests that the medial OFC maintains steady stimulus–outcome associations, whereas the lateral OFC represents changing (unsteady) outcomes to prepare for response shifts. These two hypotheses were contrasted by comparing the original with the inverted version of the Iowa Gambling Task in an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment. Results showed (1) that (caudo)lateral OFC was indeed sensitive to the steadiness of the outcomes and not merely to outcome valence and (2) that the original and the inverted tasks, although both designed to measure sensitivity for future outcomes, were not equivalent as they enacted different behaviors and brain activation patterns. Results are interpreted in terms of Kahneman and Tversky's prospect theory suggesting that cognitions and decisions are biased differentially when probabilistic future rewards are weighed against consistent punishments relative to the opposite scenario [Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350, 1984]. Specialized processing of unsteady rewards (involving caudolateral OFC) may have developed during evolution in support of goal-related thinking, prospective planning, and problem solving.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Clark, A. Bechara, H. Damasio, M. R. F. Aitken, B. J. Sahakian, and T. W. Robbins Differential effects of insular and ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions on risky decision-making Brain, May 1, 2008; 131(5): 1311 - 1322. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]