Dataset Information

Mood As Cumulative Expectation Mismatch: A Test of Theory Based on Data from Non-verbal Cognitive Bias Tests.

ABSTRACT: Affective states are known to influence behavior and cognitive processes. To assess mood (moderately long-term affective states), the cognitive judgment bias test was developed and has been widely used in various animal species. However, little is known about how mood changes, how mood can be experimentally manipulated, and how mood then feeds back into cognitive judgment. A recent theory argues that mood reflects the cumulative impact of differences between obtained outcomes and expectations. Here expectations refer to an established context. Situations in which an established context fails to match an outcome are then perceived as mismatches of expectation and outcome. We take advantage of the large number of studies published on non-verbal cognitive bias tests in recent years (95 studies with a total of 162 independent tests) to test whether cumulative mismatch could indeed have led to the observed mood changes. Based on a criteria list, we assessed whether mismatch had occurred with the experimental procedure used to induce mood (mood induction mismatch), or in the context of the non-verbal cognitive bias procedure (testing mismatch). For the mood induction mismatch, we scored the mismatch between the subjects' potential expectations and the manipulations conducted for inducing mood whereas, for the testing mismatch, we scored mismatches that may have occurred during the actual testing. We then investigated whether these two types of mismatch can predict the actual outcome of the cognitive bias study. The present evaluation shows that mood induction mismatch cannot well predict the success of a cognitive bias test. On the other hand, testing mismatch can modulate or even inverse the expected outcome. We think, cognitive bias studies should more specifically aim at creating expectation mismatch while inducing mood states to test the cumulative mismatch theory more properly. Furthermore, testing mismatch should be avoided as much as possible because it can reverse the affective state of animals as measured in a cognitive judgment bias paradigm.

SUBMITTER: Raoult CMC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5824615 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mood As Cumulative Expectation Mismatch: A Test of Theory Based on Data from Non-verbal Cognitive Bias Tests.

Raoult Camille M C CMC Moser Julia J Gygax Lorenz L

Frontiers in psychology 20171214

Affective states are known to influence behavior and cognitive processes. To assess mood (moderately long-term affective states), the cognitive judgment bias test was developed and has been widely used in various animal species. However, little is known about how mood changes, how mood can be experimentally manipulated, and how mood then feeds back into cognitive judgment. A recent theory argues that mood reflects the cumulative impact of differences between obtained outcomes and expectations. H ...[more]

PMID: 29491844

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is an ethical and scientific need for objective, well-validated measures of low mood in captive chimpanzees. We describe the development of a novel cognitive task designed to measure 'pessimistic' bias in judgments of expectation of reward, a cognitive marker of low mood previously validated in a wide range of species, and report training and test data from three common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). The chimpanzees were trained on an arbitrary visual discrimination in which lifting a pale grey paper cone was associated with reinforcement with a peanut, whereas lifting a dark grey cone was associated with no reward. The discrimination was trained by sequentially presenting the two cone types until significant differences in latency to touch the cone types emerged, and was confirmed by simultaneously presenting both cone types in choice trials. Subjects were subsequently tested on their latency to touch unrewarded cones of three intermediate shades of grey not previously seen. Pessimism was indicated by the similarity between the latency to touch intermediate cones and the latency to touch the trained, unreinforced, dark grey cones. Three subjects completed training and testing, two adult males and one adult female. All subjects learnt the discrimination (107-240 trials), and retained it during five sessions of testing. There was no evidence that latencies to lift intermediate cones increased over testing, as would have occurred if subjects learnt that these were never rewarded, suggesting that the task could be used for repeated testing of individual animals. There was a significant difference between subjects in their relative latencies to touch intermediate cones (pessimism index) that emerged following the second test session, and was not changed by the addition of further data. The most dominant male subject was least pessimistic, and the female most pessimistic. We argue that the task has the potential to be used to assess longitudinal changes in sub-clinical levels of low mood in chimpanzees, however further work with a larger sample of animals is required to validate this claim.

Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this research is to understand the thought processes that underpin responses to stated preference approaches for eliciting quality of life, in particular the standard gamble.MethodsWe utilize standard gamble preference elicitation survey techniques to elicit quality-adjusted life year weights for two reduced health states: chronic severe depression and total blindness. After the survey, we conduct open-ended qualitative interviews with respondents to determine their thought processes while taking the surveys and to shed light on what their quality-adjusted life year weight is capturing. Survey responses were coded and analyzed for themes in NVivo, the results of which were then formalized in the terminology of decision sciences.ResultsThe qualitative results of the cognitive interviews present systematic evidence for a type of cognitive bias present in standard gamble quality-adjusted life year weight elicitation, which has not been previously highlighted and which we call treatment bias. We define this treatment bias as the consideration of salient treatment alternatives correlated with a reduced health state, when these alternatives are not explicitly posed in the question. Our formalization of this cognitive behavior demonstrates that treatment bias will always bias the elicited health state utility of treating the illness in question downward.ConclusionThe treatment bias highlighted in this study has implications for economic evaluation when comparing treatment for illnesses where alternative treatments are widely publicized versus those that are not. For example, comparing the effectiveness of treating depression versus arthritis may be biased against depression if advertisements for anti-depressants are more widely viewed by survey respondents than advertisements for arthritis treatments. We propose a statement to be imbedded in all questionnaires regarding stated preference elicitation of quality-adjusted life year weights in order to correct for this bias in future stated preference surveys.

Dataset Information

Mood As Cumulative Expectation Mismatch: A Test of Theory Based on Data from Non-verbal Cognitive Bias Tests.

Publications

Mood As Cumulative Expectation Mismatch: A Test of Theory Based on Data from Non-verbal Cognitive Bias Tests.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets