Results 231 to 240 of about 32,514 (274)

Iowa Gambling Task in Parkinson's Disease

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 2010
Cognitive impairments are common in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) from the early stages. Recent studies reported that medicated PD patients have poor performances, with respect to age-matched healthy controls, in a decision-making task like the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), which detects the ability to alter choice behavior in response to ...
Poletti M   +2 more
openaire   +3 more sources

Construct Validity of the Iowa Gambling Task

Neuropsychology Review, 2009
The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) was created to assess real-world decision making in a laboratory setting and has been applied to various clinical populations (i.e., substance abuse, schizophrenia, pathological gamblers) outside those with orbitofrontal cortex damage, for whom it was originally developed.
Melissa T, Buelow, Julie A, Suhr
openaire   +2 more sources

The Iowa Gambling Task on HIV-infected subjects

Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, 2020
HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) are characterized by cognitive, behavioral, and motor dysfunctions, which impact daily functioning and are predictive of poor survival among patients. The diagnosis of HAND is marked by clinically significant declines in multiple domains of neurocognitive functioning. Some patients diagnosed with HAND have
Aya, Nakao   +3 more
openaire   +2 more sources

Underlying decision making processes on Iowa Gambling Task

Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 2019
Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) assesses decision making in uncertain conditions. Several studies have reported impaired performance on IGT in various clinical population compared to healthy normal. However, some researchers have reported incongruent findings from the basic assumptions of IGT in healthy normal.
Rajesh, Kumar   +2 more
openaire   +2 more sources

Performance and awareness in the Iowa Gambling Task

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2014
AbstractNewell & Shanks (N&S) conclude that healthy participants learn to differentiate between the good and bad decks of the Iowa Gambling Task, and that healthy participants even have conscious knowledge about the task's payoff structure. Improved methods of analysis and new behavioral findings suggest that this conclusion is premature.
Steingroever, H., Wagenmakers, E.-J.
openaire   +3 more sources

Paradoxical effects of education on the Iowa Gambling Task

Brain and Cognition, 2004
Suitable normative information on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is not currently available, though it is clear that there is great individual variability in performance on this assessment tool. Given that the task is presumed to measure the emotion-based learning systems that are thought to form the biological basis of 'intuition,' there is some reason ...
Cathryn E Y, Evans   +2 more
openaire   +2 more sources

Methodological Flexibility in the Iowa Gambling Task

2022
The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is an experimental paradigm in the form of a card game designed to simulate realistic decision-making situations with unknown premises and uncertain consequences. In psychological research, the IGT is frequently used to assess the decision-making ability of specific population groups.
openaire   +1 more source

Iowa Gambling Task performance in currently depressed suicide attempters

Psychiatry Research, 2013
Deficits in decision-making using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) have been found in past suicide attempters, but primarily euthymic and/or medicated patients. This study compared IGT performance among medication-free, currently depressed patients (unipolar and bipolar) with (n=26) and without (n=46) a past history of suicide attempt, and healthy ...
Marianne, Gorlyn   +4 more
openaire   +2 more sources

Performance of healthy participants on the Iowa Gambling Task.

Psychological Assessment, 2013
The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT; Bechara, Damasio, Damasio, & Anderson, 1994) is often used to assess decision-making deficits in clinical populations. The interpretation of the results hinges on 3 key assumptions: (a) healthy participants learn to prefer the good options over the bad options; (b) healthy participants show homogeneous choice behavior; and (
Helen Steingroever   +4 more
openaire   +5 more sources

Home - About - Disclaimer - Privacy