Danielle C Farrar, Ronald J Killiany, Mark B Moss, Brandi Fink, Andrew E Budson
{"title":"Event-related Potentials Corresponding to Decision-making Under Uncertain Conditions.","authors":"Danielle C Farrar, Ronald J Killiany, Mark B Moss, Brandi Fink, Andrew E Budson","doi":"10.1097/WNN.0000000000000346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decision-making is essential to human functioning, and resolving uncertainty is an essential part of decision-making. Impaired decision-making is present in many pathological conditions, and identifying markers of decision-making under uncertainty will provide a measure of clinical impact in future studies of therapeutic intervention for impaired decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe EEG event-related potentials (ERPs) correlating with decision-making under uncertain conditions when compared with certain conditions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used a novel card-matching task based on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test to describe the neural correlates of uncertainty, as measured by EEG, in a group of 27 neurotypical individuals. We evaluated 500-ms intervals in the 2 seconds after card presentation to identify ERPs that are associated with maximal uncertainty compared with maximal certainty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After correcting for multiple comparisons, we identified an ERP in the 500-1000-ms time frame (certain > uncertain, max amplitude 12.73 µV, latency 914 ms) in the left posterior inferior region of the scalp. We also found a P300-like ERP in the left frontal and parietal regions in the 0-500-ms time frame when the individuals received correct versus incorrect feedback (incorrect feedback > correct feedback, max amplitude 1.625 µV, latency 339 ms).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We identified an ERP in the 500-1000-ms time frame (certain > uncertain) that may reflect the resolution of uncertainty, as well as a P300-like ERP when feedback is presented (incorrect feedback > correct feedback). These findings can be used in future studies to improve decision-making and resolve uncertainty on the described markers.</p>","PeriodicalId":50671,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000346","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Decision-making is essential to human functioning, and resolving uncertainty is an essential part of decision-making. Impaired decision-making is present in many pathological conditions, and identifying markers of decision-making under uncertainty will provide a measure of clinical impact in future studies of therapeutic intervention for impaired decision-making.
Objective: To describe EEG event-related potentials (ERPs) correlating with decision-making under uncertain conditions when compared with certain conditions.
Method: We used a novel card-matching task based on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test to describe the neural correlates of uncertainty, as measured by EEG, in a group of 27 neurotypical individuals. We evaluated 500-ms intervals in the 2 seconds after card presentation to identify ERPs that are associated with maximal uncertainty compared with maximal certainty.
Results: After correcting for multiple comparisons, we identified an ERP in the 500-1000-ms time frame (certain > uncertain, max amplitude 12.73 µV, latency 914 ms) in the left posterior inferior region of the scalp. We also found a P300-like ERP in the left frontal and parietal regions in the 0-500-ms time frame when the individuals received correct versus incorrect feedback (incorrect feedback > correct feedback, max amplitude 1.625 µV, latency 339 ms).
Conclusion: We identified an ERP in the 500-1000-ms time frame (certain > uncertain) that may reflect the resolution of uncertainty, as well as a P300-like ERP when feedback is presented (incorrect feedback > correct feedback). These findings can be used in future studies to improve decision-making and resolve uncertainty on the described markers.
期刊介绍:
Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology (CBN) is a forum for advances in the neurologic understanding and possible treatment of human disorders that affect thinking, learning, memory, communication, and behavior. As an incubator for innovations in these fields, CBN helps transform theory into practice. The journal serves clinical research, patient care, education, and professional advancement.
The journal welcomes contributions from neurology, cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology, neuropsychiatry, and other relevant fields. The editors particularly encourage review articles (including reviews of clinical practice), experimental and observational case reports, instructional articles for interested students and professionals in other fields, and innovative articles that do not fit neatly into any category. Also welcome are therapeutic trials and other experimental and observational studies, brief reports, first-person accounts of neurologic experiences, position papers, hypotheses, opinion papers, commentaries, historical perspectives, and book reviews.