CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prefer a cash slap in your face over credit for halva

Ekhtiari, Hamed, Behzadi, Arian, Dehghani, Morteza, Jannati, Ali, Mokri, Azarakhsh·2009·Judgment and Decision Making
DOI 10.1017/s193029750000111x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We investigated how frequency and amount of punishment affect the decision making of Iranian subjects. In our first experiment, performing a computer-based Persian version of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), our subjects scored remarkably lower than their Western counterparts. Moreover, our subjects chose more frequently and more rapidly from decks that had less frequent but larger amounts of punishments in comparison to decks that had more frequent punishments with smaller amounts. In our second experiment, subjects did not differentiate between decks with the same frequency of punishment but with different punishment amounts. However, among decks with the same amount but different frequency of punishment, a significant preference was apparent towards decks with less frequency of punishment. Our results differ from previous studies, indicating a different strategy in risky decision making among healthy adult Iranian subjects, as they show low attention to the amount of punishment and are more concerned with the frequency of punishment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s193029750000111x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 A screenshot of the Persian IGT.
Figure 1 A screenshot of the Persian IGT.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Main scores vs. Alternative scores through the 10-selection blocks (averaged for each 10 picks), fitted to linear curves. Alternative score shows significant better improvement through the task.
Figure 2 Main scores vs. Alternative scores through the 10-selection blocks (averaged for each 10 picks), fitted to linear curves. Alternative score shows significant better improvement through the task.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. 10.1017/S1355617707070890 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.schres.2004.03.020 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00051.x · DOI
  4. 10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00158-X · DOI
  5. 10.1080/092970490911261 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/S0920-9964(03)00086-0 · DOI
  7. Javadian, 2003, Culture and leadership in Iran: The land of individual achievers, strong family ties, and powerful elite, Academy of Management Executive, 17, 127
  8. Cole, 1996, Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline.
  9. Markman, 2002, Decision making. Stevens Handbook of Experimental Psychology, 2
  10. 10.1207/s15326942dn2503_2 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.012 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.bandc.2004.02.022 · DOI
  13. 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.2.304 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1016/S0920-9964(97)00135-7 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.2307/3512141 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00111-8 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1111/1464-0597.00072 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/1464-0597.00070 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/S0028-3932(03)00081-2 · DOI
  21. Bowman, 2004, Emotion-based learning on a simplified card game: The Iowa and Bangor Gambling Tasks, Brain and Cognition, 21
  22. 10.1093/cercor/bhh083 · DOI
  23. 10.1017/CBO9780511803475 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1037/0096-3445.126.1.45 · DOI
  25. Denburg, 2001, Normal aging may compromise the ability to decide advantageously., Brain and Cognition, 47, 156
  26. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-13-05473.1999 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1006/obhd.1998.2788 · DOI
  28. DeDonno, 2008, Perceived time pressure and the Iowa Gambling Task, Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 636, 10.1017/S1930297500001583 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199906)12:2<165::AID-BDM316>3.0.CO;2-N · DOI
  30. Afary, 1996, The Iranian Constitutional Revolution, 1906–1911: Grassroots Democracy, Social Democracy, and the Origins of Feminism.
  31. 10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.021 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/cercor/6.2.215 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1093/cercor/10.3.295 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1136/jnnp.74.3.376 · DOI
  35. Bartke, 2008, Risk-averse by nation or by religion, SOEPpapers 1/31/2008, Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) at German Institute for Economic Research
  36. 10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00113-7 · DOI
  37. Ekhtiari, 2001, Advances in Cognitive Science Studies, 3, 62
  38. 10.1037/0735-7044.115.1.196 · DOI
  39. 10.1037/0882-7974.20.2.220 · DOI
  40. 10.1111/1464-0597.00005 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ekhtiari, H., Behzadi, A., Dehghani, M., Jannati, A., & Mokri, A.
Venue
Judgment and Decision Making
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2009-12
Volume
4
Issue
7
Pages
534-542
ISSN
1930-2975
DOI
10.1017/s193029750000111x
Cited by
8
References
1
Language
en
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 4779 d)

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