Can the uncertainty appraisal associated with emotion cancel the effect of the hunch period in the Iowa Gambling Task?

Abstract

Research has given little attention to the influence of incidental emotions on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), in which processing of the emotional cues associated with each decision is necessary to make advantageous decisions. Drawing on cognitive theories of emotions, we tested whether uncertainty-associated emotion can cancel the positive effect of the hunch period, by preventing participants from developing a tendency towards advantageous decisions. Our explanation is that uncertainty appraisals initiate deliberative processing that is irrelevant to process emotional cues, contrary to intuitive processing (Kahneman, 2003; Tiedens & Linton, 2001). As expected, uncertainty-associated emotion cancelled the positive effect of the hunch period in the IGT compared to certainty-associated emotion: disgusted participants (certainty-associated emotion) and sad participants induced to feel certainty developed a stronger tendency towards advantageous decisions than sad participants induced to feel uncertainty. We discuss the importance of the core components that trigger incidental emotions to predict decision making.

Keywords:

• Uncertainty
• Intuitive processing
• Sequential task
• Emotion

Notes

¹Contrary to integral emotions, incidental emotions refer to the normatively irrelevant influence of subjective emotional experiences for the current situation because elicited by an unrelated situation (Keltner & Lerner, 2010).

²We conducted our experiments by using the standard IGT (Bechara et al., 1994). However, the results of these experiments, which were carried out with French participants, did not replicate those in the literature. An investigation revealed that the participants did not try to find a strategy, and that they believed in luck, as in France gambling is strongly associated with luck. Consequently, for the present study the task was presented as a computerised stock-market investment simulation to mask its gambling connotation. This was done to encourage participants to develop strategies that would allow them to succeed. Moreover, participants were informed that they had to earn a minimum of €3,750, and that they would receive a score of their reasoning abilities as feedback. This manipulation was expected to ensure participants would focus on the task.

³Data of three participants were not recorded, explaining differences of degrees of freedom.