Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/110840
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences-
dc.contributorUniversity Research Facility in Behavioral and Systems Neuroscience-
dc.contributorMental Health Research Centre-
dc.creatorWong, JJ-
dc.creatorBongioanni, A-
dc.creatorRushworth, MFS-
dc.creatorChau, BKH-
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-11T05:00:44Z-
dc.date.available2025-02-11T05:00:44Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/110840-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publishereLife Sciences Publicationsen_US
dc.rightsCopyright Wong et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Jing Jun WongAlessandro BongioanniMatthew FS RushworthBolton KH Chau (2024) Distractor effects in decision making are related to the individual’s style of integrating choice attributes eLife 12:RP91102 is available at https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.91102.en_US
dc.titleDistractor effects in decision making are related to the individual's style of integrating choice attributesen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume12-
dc.identifier.doi10.7554/eLife.91102-
dcterms.abstractHumans make irrational decisions in the presence of irrelevant distractor options. There is little consensus on whether decision making is facilitated or impaired by the presence of a highly rewarding distractor, or whether the distractor effect operates at the level of options' component attributes rather than at the level of their overall value. To reconcile different claims, we argue that it is important to consider the diversity of people's styles of decision making and whether choice attributes are combined in an additive or multiplicative way. Employing a multi-laboratory dataset investigating the same experimental paradigm, we demonstrated that people used a mix of both approaches and the extent to which approach was used varied across individuals. Critically, we identified that this variability was correlated with the distractor effect during decision making. Individuals who tended to use a multiplicative approach to compute value, showed a positive distractor effect. In contrast, a negative distractor effect (divisive normalisation) was prominent in individuals tending towards an additive approach. Findings suggest that the distractor effect is related to how value is constructed, which in turn may be influenced by task and subject specificities. This concurs with recent behavioural and neuroscience findings that multiple distractor effects co-exist.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationeLife, 24 Sept., 2024, v. 12-
dcterms.isPartOfeLife-
dcterms.issued2024-09-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85204941845-
dc.identifier.pmid39316515-
dc.identifier.eissn2050-084X-
dc.description.validate202502 bcwh-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Othersen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceRGCen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextWellcome Trust ; Hong Kong Polytechnic Universityen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
elife-91102-v1.pdf2.52 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

10
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Downloads

2
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

1
Citations as of Dec 18, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.