Anterior insula activity predicts the influence of positively framed messages on decision making - PubMed (original) (raw)

Anterior insula activity predicts the influence of positively framed messages on decision making

Adam Krawitz et al. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2010 Sep.

Abstract

The neural mechanisms underlying the influence of persuasive messages on decision making are largely unknown. We address this issue using event-related fMRI to investigate how informative messages alter risk appraisal during choice. Participants performed the Iowa Gambling Task while viewing a positively framed, negatively framed, or control message about the options. The right anterior insula correlated with improvement in choice behavior due to the positively framed but not the negatively framed message. With the positively framed message, there was increased activation proportional to message effectiveness when less-preferred options were chosen, consistent with a role in the prediction of adverse outcomes. In addition, the dorsomedial and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex correlated with overall decision quality, regardless of message type. The dorsomedial region mediated the relationship between the right anterior insula and decision quality with the positively framed messages. These findings suggest a network of frontal brain regions that integrate informative messages into the evaluation of options during decision making. Supplemental procedures and results for this article may be downloaded from http://cabn.psychonomic-journals.org/content/supplemental.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1

Schematic of a trial of the Iowa Gambling Task (Bechara, et al., 1997) with informative messages in a rapid event-related fMRI design. Images across the top represent the visual layout of the display at various times during the trial. Diagram at the bottom indicates trial timecourse with durations and relevant events as classified for fMRI analysis. This and all subsequent figures are in color in the online version of the paper.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Decision quality (DQ). There were significant main effects on DQ of the message presented, the block position within the session, and the epoch within each block of trials. None of the interactions were significant. Error bars indicate within-subject SEM data (Loftus & Masson, 1994) for panels A and C and between-subject SEM for panel B. (A) DQ as a function of message. (B) DQ as a function of message and block position within the session. (C) DQ as a function of message and epoch within the block of trials.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Correlations of behavioral and neural measures during control and positively-framed message blocks. (A) Shown in blue is a region of right IFO (BA 44, peak voxel: MNI 48, 10, 10) where, for the control message, there was a correlation between decision quality (DQ) and the risk effect. Shown in green is a region of right AI (BA 13, peak voxel: MNI 34, 24, 8) where, for the positively-framed message compared to the control message, there was a correlation between message effectiveness (ME) and the heightened-risk effect. Transverse section of the human brain (MNI z = 9). The skull-stripped single-subject MNI CH2BET template was used as the background brain image in this and all subsequent figures. (B) Follow-up ROI analyses in the two regions described in A for the correlation of DQ and the risk effect with the control message (solid), the correlation of ME and the heightened-risk effect with the positively-framed message (hatched), and the correlation of ME and the heightened-risk effect with the negatively-framed message (outline). Note that the definition of these ROIs biases these comparisons in the direction found. Error bars indicate SEM. (C and D) Plots of the control message correlation in right IFO (blue) and the positively-framed message correlation in right AI (green). Each point represents a participant. The dotted lines show the best-fit linear regressions.

Figure 4

Figure 4

ROI analysis for the right AI region shown in Figure 2A identified by the correlation of message effectiveness (ME) and the heightened-risk effect for the positively-framed message. (A) Correlation between ME and activation associated with selections from bad decks (magenta) and good decks (cyan) for the positively-framed message compared to the control message. Error bars indicate SEM. (B and C) Plots of the correlations shown in A for selections from bad decks (magenta) and good decks (cyan). Each point represents a participant. The dotted lines show the best-fit linear regressions.

Figure 5

Figure 5

ACC and MPFC regions showing correlations of decision quality and the risk effect averaging across all messages. (A) Shown in orange is a region of left ACC and MPFC (BA 6/32, peak voxel: MNI −6, 28, 38) where, averaging across messages, there is a correlation between decision quality (DQ) and the risk effect. Sagittal section of the human brain (MNI x = −6). (B) Within the region shown in A, confirmatory ROI analysis illustrates that DQ is highly correlated with the risk effect when averaging across all messages (orange). In addition, when considering only the control message (blue), DQ is correlated with the risk effect, and for both the positively-framed (green) and the negatively-framed (red) informative message, message effectiveness (ME) is correlated with the heightened-risk effect. Error bars indicate SEM. (C) The correlation of DQ and the risk effect averaged across messages (orange). (D) The correlation of DQ and the risk effect with the control message (blue). (E and F) The correlation of ME and the heightened-risk effect with both the positively-framed (green) and negaitvely-framed (red) message. For panels C-F, each point represents a participant, and the dotted lines show the best-fit linear regressions.

Figure 6

Figure 6

Analyses showing that, for the positively-framed message, the ACC/MPFC mediates the relationship between the right AI and decision quality. (A) The ACC/MPFC ROI (orange) significantly mediates the relationship between the right AI ROI (green) and decision quality. * = p < .05; ** = p < .01. (B) The yellow region (BA 32, peak voxel: MNI 6, 14, 40) is significant in a whole-brain voxel-by-voxel search for mediators of the relationship between the right AI ROI (green) and decision quality (see Table S3 for a list of all significant regions). (C) Closeup view showing overlap of the ACC/MPFC ROI (orange) and the region identified in the whole-brain mediation analysis (yellow). (D) Summary of regions identified in this study on an interior view of the human brain. Right IFO (blue) identified from control message blocks. Right AI (green) identified from positively-framed message blocks. ACC/MPFC and left DLPFC (orange) identified by averaging across all message blocks. Black dotted lines indicate proposed path for influence of positively-framed messages, supported by functional mediation analysis.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Barbas H, Pandya DN. Architecture and intrinsic connections of the prefrontal cortex in the rhesus monkey. Journal of Comparative Neurology. 1989;286(3):353–375. doi:10.1002/cne.902860306. - PubMed
    1. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;51(6):1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173. - PubMed
    1. Bechara A, Damasio AR. The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behavior. 2005;52(2):336–372. doi:10.1016/j.geb.2004.06.010.
    1. Bechara A, Damasio AR, Damasio H, Anderson SW. Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition. 1994;50(1-3):7–15. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3. - PubMed
    1. Bechara A, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio AR. Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science. 1997;275(5304):1293–1295. doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources