» Articles » PMID: 22403525

Distinction Between Externally Vs. Internally Guided Decision-Making: Operational Differences, Meta-Analytical Comparisons and Their Theoretical Implications

Overview
Journal Front Neurosci
Date 2012 Mar 10
PMID 22403525
Citations 42
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Most experimental studies of decision-making have specifically examined situations in which a single less-predictable correct answer exists (externally guided decision-making under uncertainty). Along with such externally guided decision-making, there are instances of decision-making in which no correct answer based on external circumstances is available for the subject (internally guided decision-making). Such decisions are usually made in the context of moral decision-making as well as in preference judgment, where the answer depends on the subject's own, i.e., internal, preferences rather than on external, i.e., circumstantial, criteria. The neuronal and psychological mechanisms that allow guidance of decisions based on more internally oriented criteria in the absence of external ones remain unclear. This study was undertaken to compare decision-making of these two kinds empirically and theoretically. First, we reviewed studies of decision-making to clarify experimental-operational differences between externally guided and internally guided decision-making. Second, using multi-level kernel density analysis, a whole-brain-based quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies was performed. Our meta-analysis revealed that the neural network used predominantly for internally guided decision-making differs from that for externally guided decision-making under uncertainty. This result suggests that studying only externally guided decision-making under uncertainty is insufficient to account for decision-making processes in the brain. Finally, based on the review and results of the meta-analysis, we discuss the differences and relations between decision-making of these two types in terms of their operational, neuronal, and theoretical characteristics.

Citing Articles

The more random people's preference judgments are, the more they explore in gambling tasks.

Zhu J, Katahira K, Hirakawa M, Nakao T BMC Psychol. 2024; 12(1):766.

PMID: 39707509 PMC: 11662857. DOI: 10.1186/s40359-024-02252-0.


Self-satisfaction described by Zuckerman's alternative five factors of personality.

cekrlija D, Schermer J Curr Issues Personal Psychol. 2024; 12(3):161-169.

PMID: 39184900 PMC: 11339844. DOI: 10.5114/cipp/174518.


Alterations in electroencephalographic functional connectivity in individuals with major depressive disorder: a resting-state electroencephalogram study.

Wang Y, Chen Y, Cui Y, Zhao T, Wang B, Zheng Y Front Neurosci. 2024; 18:1412591.

PMID: 39055996 PMC: 11270625. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1412591.


Internally Formed Preferences for Options only Influence Initial Decisions in Gambling Tasks, while the Gambling Outcomes do not Alter these Preferences.

Zhu J, Katahira K, Hirakawa M, Nakao T J Gambl Stud. 2024; .

PMID: 38922495 DOI: 10.1007/s10899-024-10326-2.


Caudate functional networks influence brain structural changes with aging.

Basaia S, Zavarella M, Rugarli G, Sferruzza G, Cividini C, Canu E Brain Commun. 2024; 6(2):fcae116.

PMID: 38665962 PMC: 11043654. DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcae116.


References
1.
Moll J, de Oliveira-Souza R, Bramati I, Grafman J . Functional networks in emotional moral and nonmoral social judgments. Neuroimage. 2002; 16(3 Pt 1):696-703. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2002.1118. View

2.
Cohen M . Individual differences and the neural representations of reward expectation and reward prediction error. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2007; 2(1):20-30. PMC: 1945222. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsl021. View

3.
Assaf M, Kahn I, Pearlson G, Johnson M, Yeshurun Y, Calhoun V . Brain Activity Dissociates Mentalization from Motivation During an Interpersonal Competitive Game. Brain Imaging Behav. 2010; 3(1):24-37. PMC: 2804999. DOI: 10.1007/s11682-008-9047-y. View

4.
Rolls E . The functions of the orbitofrontal cortex. Brain Cogn. 2004; 55(1):11-29. DOI: 10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00277-X. View

5.
Wager T, Lindquist M, Kaplan L . Meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging data: current and future directions. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2008; 2(2):150-8. PMC: 2555451. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsm015. View