Dataset Information

Decisions during negatively-framed messages yield smaller risk-aversion-related brain activation in substance-dependent individuals.

ABSTRACT: A sizable segment of addiction research investigates the effects of persuasive message appeals on risky and deleterious behaviors. However, to date, little research has examined how various forms of message framing and corresponding behavioral choices might by mediated by risk-related brain regions. Using event-related functional MRI, we investigated brain regions hypothesized to mediate the influence of message appeals on decision making in substance-dependent (SD) compared with nonsubstance-dependent (non-SD) individuals. The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) was modified to include positively-framed, negatively-framed, and control messages about long-term deck payoffs. In the positively-framed condition, the SD and non-SD groups showed improved decision-making performance that corresponded to higher risk-aversion-related brain activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and anterior insula (AI). In contrast, in the negatively-framed condition, the SD group showed poorer performance that corresponded to lower risk-aversion-related brain activity in the AI region. In addition, only the non-SD group showed a positive association between decision quality and greater risk-related activity in the ACC, regardless of message type. The findings suggest substance-dependent individuals may have reduced neurocognitive sensitivity in the ACC and AI regions involved in risk perception and aversion during decision-making, especially in response to framed messages that emphasize reduced prospects for long-term gains.

SUBMITTER: Fukunaga R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3577955 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Decisions during negatively-framed messages yield smaller risk-aversion-related brain activation in substance-dependent individuals.

Fukunaga Rena R Bogg Tim T Finn Peter R PR Brown Joshua W JW

Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors 20121112 4

A sizable segment of addiction research investigates the effects of persuasive message appeals on risky and deleterious behaviors. However, to date, little research has examined how various forms of message framing and corresponding behavioral choices might by mediated by risk-related brain regions. Using event-related functional MRI, we investigated brain regions hypothesized to mediate the influence of message appeals on decision making in substance-dependent (SD) compared with nonsubstance-de ...[more]

PMID: 23148798

Similar Datasets

Project description:Smoking accounts for a large proportion of cancer-related mortality, creating a need for better smoking cessation efforts. We investigated whether gain-framed messages (ie, presenting benefits of quitting) will be a more persuasive method to encourage smoking cessation than standard-care messages (ie, presenting both costs of smoking [loss-framed] and benefits of quitting).Twenty-eight specialists working at the New York State Smokers' Quitline (a free telephone-based smoking cessation service) were randomly assigned to provide gain-framed or standard-care counseling and print materials. Smokers (n = 2032) who called the New York State Smokers' Quitline between March 10, 2008, and June 13, 2008, were exposed to either gain-framed (n = 810) or standard-care (n = 1222) messages, and all medically eligible callers received nicotine replacement therapy. A subset of 400 call recordings was coded to assess treatment fidelity. All treated smokers were contacted for 2-week and 3-month follow-up interviews. All statistical tests were two-sided.Specialists providing gain-framed counseling used gain-framed statements statistically significantly more frequently than those providing standard-care counseling as assessed with frequency ratings for the two types of gain-framed statements, achieving benefits and avoiding negative consequences (for achieving benefits, gain-framed mean frequency rating = 3.9 vs standard-care mean frequency rating = 1.4; mean difference = -2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.8 to -2.3; P < .001; for avoiding negative consequences, gain-framed mean frequency rating = 1.5 vs standard-card mean frequency rating = 1.0; mean difference = -0.5; 95% CI = -0.6 to -0.3; P < .001). Gain-framed counseling was associated with a statistically significantly higher rate of abstinence at the 2-week follow-up (ie, 99 [23.3%] of the 424 in the gain-framed group vs 76 [12.6%] of the 603 in the standard-care group, P < .001) but not at the 3-month follow-up (ie, 148 [28.4%] of the 522 in the gain-framed group vs 202 [26.6%] of the 760 in the standard-care group, P = .48).Quitline specialists can be trained to provide gain-framed counseling with good fidelity. Also, gain-framed messages appear to be somewhat more persuasive than standard-care messages in promoting early success in smoking cessation.

Project description:BACKGROUND: We conducted an Internet-based randomized trial comparing three valence framing presentations of the benefits of antihypertensive medication in preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD) for people with newly diagnosed hypertension to determine which framing presentation resulted in choices most consistent with participants' values. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this second in a series of televised trials in cooperation with the Norwegian Broadcasting Company, adult volunteers rated the relative importance of the consequences of taking antihypertensive medication using visual analogue scales (VAS). Participants viewed information (or no information) to which they were randomized and decided whether or not to take medication. We compared positive framing over 10 years (the number escaping CVD per 1000); negative framing over 10 years (the number that will have CVD) and negative framing per year over 10 years of the effects of antihypertensive medication on the 10-year risk for CVD for a 40 year-old man with newly diagnosed hypertension without other risk factors. Finally, all participants were shown all presentations and detailed patient information about hypertension and were asked to decide again. We calculated a relative importance score (RIS) by subtracting the VAS-scores for the undesirable consequences of antihypertensive medication from the VAS-score for the benefit of CVD risk reduction. We used logistic regression to determine the association between participants' RIS and their choice. 1,528 participants completed the study. The statistically significant differences between the groups in the likelihood of choosing to take antihypertensive medication in relation to different values (RIS) increased as the RIS increased. Positively framed information lead to decisions most consistent with those made by everyone for the second, more fully informed decision. There was a statistically significant decrease in deciding to take antihypertensives on the second decision, both within groups and overall. CONCLUSIONS: For decisions about taking antihypertensive medication for people with a relatively low baseline risk of CVD (70 per 1000 over 10 years), both positive and negative framing resulted in significantly more people deciding to take medication compared to what participants decided after being shown all three of the presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register ISRCTN 33771631.

Dataset Information

Decisions during negatively-framed messages yield smaller risk-aversion-related brain activation in substance-dependent individuals.

Publications

Decisions during negatively-framed messages yield smaller risk-aversion-related brain activation in substance-dependent individuals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets