See the published version of this preprint at BMC Neuroscience.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ting-Peng Liang
National Sun Yat-sen University
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0297-4429
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Escalation of commitment is a common bias in human decision making. The present study examined (1) differences in neural recruitment for escalation and de-escalation decisions of prior investments, and (2) how the activations of these brain networks are modulated by two factors that are often argued to modulate the behavior: (i) self-responsibility, and (ii) framing of the success probabilities.
Results: Imaging data were obtained from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) applied to 29 participants. A whole-brain analysis was conducted to compare brain activations between conditions. ROI analysis, then, was used to examine if these significant activations were modulated by two contextual factors. Finally, mediation analysis was applied to explore how the contextual factors affect escalation decisions through brain activations. The findings showed that (1) escalation decisions are faster than de-escalation decisions, (2) the corresponding network of brain regions recruited for escalation (anterior cingulate cortex, insula and precuneus) decisions differs from this recruited for de-escalation decisions (inferior and superior frontal gyri), (3) the switch from escalation to de-escalation is primarily frontal gyri dependent, and (4) activation in the anterior cingulate cortex, insula and precuneus were further increased in escalation decisions, when the outcome probabilities of the follow-up investment were positively framed; and activation in the inferior and superior frontal gyri in de-escalation decisions were increased when the outcome probabilities were negatively framed.
Conclusions: Escalation and de-escalation decisions recruit different brain regions. Framing of possible outcomes as negative leads to escalation decisions through recruitment of the inferior frontal gyrus. Responsibility for decisions affects escalation decisions through recruitment of the superior (inferior) gyrus, when the decision is framed positively (negatively).
Keywords
escalation of commitment, framing effect, responsibility, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Neuroscience.
Version 4
Posted 20 Jan, 2021
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 26 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 05 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 05 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 05 Jan, 2021
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Nov, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 22 Nov, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 14 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 13 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 07 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Sep, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 14 Jun, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 May, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 26 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 21 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 10 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 09 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 29 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 29 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 15 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 12 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 05 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 02 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 26 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 26 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 13 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Neuroscience.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ting-Peng Liang
National Sun Yat-sen University
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0297-4429
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Neuroscience.
Version 4
Posted 20 Jan, 2021
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 26 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned
On 05 Jan, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 05 Jan, 2021
Editor invited
On 05 Jan, 2021
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Nov, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 22 Nov, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 14 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 13 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 07 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Sep, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 29 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 14 Jun, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 10 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 May, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 26 May, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 21 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 10 Apr, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 09 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 29 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 29 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 15 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 12 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 05 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 02 Mar, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 26 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 26 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 13 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Neuroscience.
Background: Escalation of commitment is a common bias in human decision making. The present study examined (1) differences in neural recruitment for escalation and de-escalation decisions of prior investments, and (2) how the activations of these brain networks are modulated by two factors that are often argued to modulate the behavior: (i) self-responsibility, and (ii) framing of the success probabilities.
Results: Imaging data were obtained from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) applied to 29 participants. A whole-brain analysis was conducted to compare brain activations between conditions. ROI analysis, then, was used to examine if these significant activations were modulated by two contextual factors. Finally, mediation analysis was applied to explore how the contextual factors affect escalation decisions through brain activations. The findings showed that (1) escalation decisions are faster than de-escalation decisions, (2) the corresponding network of brain regions recruited for escalation (anterior cingulate cortex, insula and precuneus) decisions differs from this recruited for de-escalation decisions (inferior and superior frontal gyri), (3) the switch from escalation to de-escalation is primarily frontal gyri dependent, and (4) activation in the anterior cingulate cortex, insula and precuneus were further increased in escalation decisions, when the outcome probabilities of the follow-up investment were positively framed; and activation in the inferior and superior frontal gyri in de-escalation decisions were increased when the outcome probabilities were negatively framed.
Conclusions: Escalation and de-escalation decisions recruit different brain regions. Framing of possible outcomes as negative leads to escalation decisions through recruitment of the inferior frontal gyrus. Responsibility for decisions affects escalation decisions through recruitment of the superior (inferior) gyrus, when the decision is framed positively (negatively).
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...