Dataset Information

Weight-based discrimination in financial reward and punishment decision making: causal evidence using a novel experimental paradigm.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objectives

Cross-sectional research has demonstrated weight-related stigma and discrimination, however experimental research providing causal evidence of financial-based weight discrimination is lacking. The aim of these preregistered experiments was to examine whether a novel paradigm in which participants attributed financial rewards and punishments could be used to detect weight bias.

Subjects/methods

One-hundred and twenty-one individuals participated in experiment 1 and one-hundred and sixty-six individuals participated in experiment 2. Both studies were conducted online, and participants were provided with biographies of hypothetical individuals in which weight-status was manipulated (normal weight vs. overweight/obesity) before being asked to provide rewards and punishments on their cognitive performance. In experiment 1 (within-participants design) participants observed one individual they believed to be normal weight and one individual they believed to be overweight/have obesity. In experiment 2 (between-participants design) participants observed one individual whilst also being provided with information about food addiction (Food addiction is real + individual with overweight/obesity vs. food addiction is a myth + individual with overweight/obesity vs control + individual with normal weight).

Results

In experiment 1, participants punished individuals who were described as having overweight/obesity to a greater extent to individuals who were normal weight (Hedge's g = -0.21 [95% CI: -0.02 to -0.41], p = 0.026), but there was no effect on rewards. They were also less likely to recommend individuals with overweight/obesity to pass the tasks (X²(1) = 10.05, p = 0.002). In experiment 2, participants rewarded individuals whom they believed were overweight/obese to a lesser extent than normal-weight individuals (g = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.16 to 0.83]. There was no effect on punishment, nor any impact of information regarding food addiction as real vs a myth.

Conclusion

Using a novel discrimination task, these two experiments demonstrate causal evidence of weight-based discrimination in financial decision making.

SUBMITTER: Jones A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9239905 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study investigates if and under which conditions humans are able to identify and follow the most advantageous leader who will them provide with the most resources. In an iterated economic game with the aim of earning monetary reward, 150 participants were asked to repeatedly choose one out of four leaders. Unbeknownst to participants, the leaders were computer-controlled and programmed to yield different expected payout values that participants had to infer from repeated interaction over 30 rounds. Additionally, participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: single, independent, or cohesion. The conditions were designed to investigate the ideal circumstances that lead to identifying the most advantageous leader: when participants are alone (single condition), in a group that lets individuals sample information about leaders independently (independent condition), or in a group that is rewarded for cohesive behavior (cohesion condition). Our results show that participants are generally able to identify the most advantageous leader. However, participants who were incentivized to act cohesively in a group were more likely to settle on a less advantageous leader. This suggests that cohesion might have a detrimental effect on group decision making. To test the validity of this finding, we explore possible explanations for this pattern, such as the length of exploration and exploitation phases, and present techniques to check for confounding factors in group experiments in order to identify or exclude them as alternative explanations. Finally, we show that the chosen reward structure of the game strongly affects the observed following behavior in the group and possibly occludes other effects. We conclude with a recommendation to carefully choose reward structures and evaluate possible alternative explanations in experimental group research that should further pursue the study of exploration/exploitation phases and the influence of group cohesion on group decision making as promising topics for further research.

Project description:There is significant evidence that in addition to reward-punishment based decision making, the Basal Ganglia (BG) contributes to risk-based decision making (Balasubramani et al., 2014). Despite this evidence, little is known about the computational principles and neural correlates of risk computation in this subcortical system. We have previously proposed a reinforcement learning (RL)-based model of the BG that simulates the interactions between dopamine (DA) and serotonin (5HT) in a diverse set of experimental studies including reward, punishment and risk based decision making (Balasubramani et al., 2014). Starting with the classical idea that the activity of mesencephalic DA represents reward prediction error, the model posits that serotoninergic activity in the striatum controls risk-prediction error. Our prior model of the BG was an abstract model that did not incorporate anatomical and cellular-level data. In this work, we expand the earlier model into a detailed network model of the BG and demonstrate the joint contributions of DA-5HT in risk and reward-punishment sensitivity. At the core of the proposed network model is the following insight regarding cellular correlates of value and risk computation. Just as DA D1 receptor (D1R) expressing medium spiny neurons (MSNs) of the striatum were thought to be the neural substrates for value computation, we propose that DA D1R and D2R co-expressing MSNs are capable of computing risk. Though the existence of MSNs that co-express D1R and D2R are reported by various experimental studies, prior existing computational models did not include them. Ours is the first model that accounts for the computational possibilities of these co-expressing D1R-D2R MSNs, and describes how DA and 5HT mediate activity in these classes of neurons (D1R-, D2R-, D1R-D2R- MSNs). Starting from the assumption that 5HT modulates all MSNs, our study predicts significant modulatory effects of 5HT on D2R and co-expressing D1R-D2R MSNs which in turn explains the multifarious functions of 5HT in the BG. The experiments simulated in the present study relates 5HT to risk sensitivity and reward-punishment learning. Furthermore, our model is shown to capture reward-punishment and risk based decision making impairment in Parkinson's Disease (PD). The model predicts that optimizing 5HT levels along with DA medications might be essential for improving the patients' reward-punishment learning deficits.