Download pdf
Relationship between Decision-Making and Executive Function in Conditions of Age, Risk, and Decision-Making Styles
- 1 Department of psychology, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
- 2 Li Po Chun United World College, Hong Kong, China
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
A narrative review of the relationship between decision-making and executive function. Iowa Gambling Task and Cognitive Reflection Test, these two Adult Decision‐Making Competence tasks, were used to measure individuals’ executive function and decision-making abilities. Age, risk level, and other characteristics all impact the link between decision-making and executive function. These factors, which play an essential variable, were discussed in the review. Research for five decision-making styles correlates with the executive function, including rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant, and spontaneous. They were also discussed and compared with the age factors. Moreover, the dangers like internet disorder and pathological gambling, which come from the deficit of executive function, have been argued.
Keywords
Executive function, decision-making, working memory
[1]. Bettina Gathmann, Frank P., Schulte, Stefan Maderwald, Mirko Pawlikowski, Katrin Starcke, Lena C. Schäfer, Tobias Schöler, Oliver T., Wolf, & Matthias Brand (2014). Stress and decision-making: neural correlates of the interaction between stress, executive functions, and decision-making under risk. Experimental Brain Research, 232, 957-973.
[2]. Fatima, S., Khan, M., Rosselli, M., & Ardila, A. (2020). Age, executive functioning, and decision-making styles in adults: a moderated mediation model. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 27(3), 338–350.
[3]. Reason, J. (1990) Human Error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[4]. Brand M, Fujiwara E, Borsutzky S, Kalbe E, Kessler J, Markow, itsch HJ (2005) Decision-making deficits of Korsakoff patients in a new gambling task with explicit rules: associations with executive functions. Neuropsychology 19:267–277.
[5]. Bechara A, Damasio AR, Damasio H, Anderson SW (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition 50:7–15. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3
[6]. Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2012). Explaining adult age differences in decision-making competence. Journal of Behavioral Decision-making, 25, 352–360.
[7]. Strough, J. N., Parker, A. M., Bruine de Bruin, W. (2015). Understanding life-span developmental changes in decision-making competence. In T. M. Hess, C. E. Loeckenhoff, & J. N. Strough (Eds.), Aging and decision-making: Empirical and applied perspectives (pp. 235–257). Elsevier Academic Press.
[8]. Parker, A. M., Bruine de Bruin, W., Fischhoff, B., & Weller, J. (2018). Robustness of Decision-Making Competence: Evidence from two measures and an 11-Year Longitudinal Study. Journal of Behavioral Decision-making, 31, 380-391.
[9]. Del Missier, F., Mäntylä, T., & de Bruin, W. B. (2012). Decision-making Competence, Executive Functioning, and General Cognitive Abilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision-making, 25(4), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.731
[10]. Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision-making. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 24–42.
[11]. Brand, M., & Markowitsch, H. J. (2010a). Aging and decision-making: A neurocognitive perspec- tive. Gerontology, 56, 319–324. doi:10.1159/000248829
[12]. Brand, M., & Markowitsch, H. J. (2010b). Mechanisms contributing to decision-making difficulties in late adulthood: Theoretical approaches, speculations and empirical evidence. Gerontology, 56, 435–440. doi:10.1159/000300569
[13]. Finucane, M. L., & Lees, N. B. (2005, November). Decision-making competence of older adults: Models and methods. In National Council Workshop on Decision Making by Older Adults, Washington DC.
[14]. Burgess, P. W., Veitch, E., de Lacy Costello, A., and Shallice, T. (2000). The cognitive and neuroanatomical correlates of multitasking. Neuropsychologia 38, 848–863.
[15]. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision-making style the development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 818–831.
[16]. Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). Delis-Kaplan executive function system: Technical manual. New York, NY: The Psychological Corporation.
[17]. Suchy, Y., Kraybill, M. L., & Gidley Larson, J. C. (2010). Understanding design fluency: motor and executive contributions. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 16(1), 26–37.
[18]. Zhou, Z., Zhou, H., & Zhu, H. (2016). Working memory, executive function and impulsivity in Internet-addictive disorders: A comparison with pathological gambling. Acta Neuropsychiatrica,28(2), 92-100.
Cite this article
Wang,Z.;Zhou,Y. (2023). Relationship between Decision-Making and Executive Function in Conditions of Age, Risk, and Decision-Making Styles. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,7,29-34.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the International Conference on Interdisciplinary Humanities and Communication Studies (ICIHCS 2022), Part 6
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).