A Bayesian method for measuring risk propensity in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task

The effects of sound in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task

In this study, we examined the effects of pairing sounds with positive and negative outcomes in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). A number of published studies using the BART incorporate sounds into the task, where a slot machine or cash register sound is produced when rewards are collected and a popping sound is produced when balloons pop. However, some studies do not use sound, and other studies do not specify whether sound was used. Given that sensory information contributes to the intensity of experiences, it is possible that outcome-related sounds in the BART influence risk-taking behaviors, and inconsistent use of sounds across the many BART variations may affect how results are interpreted. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of sounds paired with outcomes in the BART, and whether the presence or valence of a sound would systematically alter participants' risk-taking. Across two experiments using Bayesian censored regressions, we show that sounds, regardless of the outcomes they were paired with or their valence, did not affect risk-taking in an adult, non-clinical sample. We consider the implications of these results within methodological and theoretical contexts and encourage researchers to continue dissociating the role of auditory stimuli in feedback processing and subsequent responding.

Adaptations of the balloon analog risk task for neuroimaging settings: a systematic review

Introduction

The Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART), a computerized behavioral paradigm, is one of the most common tools used to assess the risk-taking propensity of an individual. Since its initial behavioral version, the BART has been adapted to neuroimaging technique to explore brain networks of risk-taking behavior. However, while there are a variety of paradigms adapted to neuroimaging to date, no consensus has been reached on the best paradigm with the appropriate parameters to study the brain during risk-taking assessed by the BART. In this review of the literature, we aimed to identify the most appropriate BART parameters to adapt the initial paradigm to neuroimaging and increase the reliability of this tool.

Methods

A systematic review focused on the BART versions adapted to neuroimaging was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.

Results

A total of 105 articles with 6,879 subjects identified from the PubMed database met the inclusion criteria. The BART was adapted in four neuroimaging techniques, mostly in functional magnetic resonance imaging or electroencephalography settings.

Discussion

First, to adapt the BART to neuroimaging, a delay was included between each trial, the total number of inflations was reduced between 12 and 30 pumps, and the number of trials was increased between 80 and 100 balloons, enabling us to respect the recording constraints of neuroimaging. Second, explicit feedback about the balloon burst limited the decisions under ambiguity associated with the first trials. Third, employing an outcome index that provides more informative measures than the standard average pump score, along with a model incorporating an exponential monotonic increase in explosion probability and a maximum explosion probability between 50 and 75%, can yield a reliable estimation of risk profile. Additionally, enhancing participant motivation can be achieved by increasing the reward in line with the risk level and implementing payment based on their performance in the BART. Although there is no universal adaptation of the BART to neuroimaging, and depending on the objectives of a study, an adjustment of parameters optimizes its evaluation and clinical utility in assessing risk-taking.

Appropriately Tuning Stochastic-Psychometric Properties of the Balloon Analog Risk Task

The Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART) allows to experimentally assess individuals’ risk-taking profiles in an ecologically sound setting. Many psychological and neuroscientific studies implemented the BART for its simplicity and intuitive nature. However, some issues in the design of the BART are systematically unconsidered in experimental paradigms, which may bias the estimation of individual risk-taking profiles. Since there are no methodological guidelines for implementing the BART, many variables (e.g., the maximum explosion probabilities, the rationale underlying stochastic events) vary inconstantly across experiments, possibly producing contrasting results. Moreover, the standard version of the BART is affected by the interaction of an individual-dependent, unavoidable source of stochasticity with a trial-dependent, more ambiguous source of stochasticity (i.e., the probability of the balloon to explode). This paper shows the most appropriate experimental choices for having the lowest error in the approximation of risk-taking profiles. Performance tests of a series of simulated data suggest that a more controlled, eventually non-stochastic version of the BART, better approximates original risk-taking profiles. Selecting optimal BART parameters is particularly important in neuroscience experiments to optimize the number of trials in a time window appropriate for acquiring neuroimaging data. We also provide helpful suggestions to researchers in many fields to allow the implementation of optimized risk-taking experiments using the BART.