Cited by 464Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Construct validity of the iowa gambling task

Buelow, Melissa T., Suhr, Julie A.·2009·Neuropsychology Review

Abstract

The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) was created to assess real-world decision making in a laboratory setting and has been applied to various clinical populations (i.e., substance abuse, schizophrenia, pathological gamblers) outside those with orbitofrontal cortex damage, for whom it was originally developed. The current review provides a critical examination of lesion, functional neuroimaging, developmental, and clinical studies in order to examine the construct validity of the IGT. The preponderance of evidence provides support for the use of the IGT to detect decision making deficits in clinical populations, in the context of a more comprehensive evaluation. The review includes a discussion of three critical issues affecting the validity of the IGT, as it has recently become available as a clinical instrument: the lack of a concise definition as to what aspect of decision making the IGT measures, the lack of data regarding reliability of the IGT, and the influence of personality and state mood on IGT performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11065-009-9083-4

Cites

128 of 128 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies on adults have revealed a link between risky performance in gambling tasks and clinically relevant risky behaviors.

    “However, studies on adults have revealed a link between risky performance in gambling tasks and clinically relevant risky behaviors, e.g. between the performance in the IGT and substance use disorders, pathological gambling and psychopathic behavior [70], between performance in the PD and pathological gambling as well as alcohol dependence [71], [72], and between performance on the BART and self-”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buelow, M. T., & Suhr, J. A.
Affiliations
Ohio University (US)
Corresponding author
Suhr, Julie A.
Venue
Neuropsychology Review
Published
2009-02-05
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
102-114
ISSN
  • 1040-7308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6660
OpenAlex
W2019748644
Cited by
464
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 38
FWCI
1.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
Iowa Gambling Task, construct validity, decision-making, orbitofrontal cortex, lesion studies, functional neuroimaging, substance abuse, schizophrenia, gambling addiction, test reliability, personality effects
MeSH terms
Affect, Aging, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Mental Disorders, Brain, Cognition, Decision Making, Gambling, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Personality, Schizophrenic Psychology, Reproducibility of Results, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review