Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Framing effect, probability distortion, and gambling tendency without feedback are resistant to two nights of experimental sleep restriction
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Stress Research Institute. Karolinska Institutet, Sweden; New York University, USA.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Stress Research Institute. Karolinska Institutet, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9873-2506
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 62019 (English)In: Scientific Reports, E-ISSN 2045-2322, Vol. 9, article id 8554Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Several studies suggest that sleep deprivation affects risky decision making. However, most of these are confounded by feedback given after each decision, indicating that decisions may be based on suboptimal feedback-learning rather than risk evaluation. Furthermore, few studies have investigated the effect of sleep loss on aspects of prospect theory, specifically the framing effect and probability distortion. In this within-subjects design, 25 people had (i) two nights of an 8 h sleep opportunity, and (ii) two nights of a 4 h sleep opportunity, in a counter-balanced order. Following the two nights, they performed a gambling task with no immediate feedback; for each round, they could either gamble for a full amount, or take a settlement framed as a gain or a loss for part of the amount. Sleep restriction did not significantly affect the tendency to gamble, the framing effect, or probability distortion, as compared to normal sleep. These results indicate that two nights of sleep restriction affects neither general gambling tendency, nor two of the main predictions of prospect theory. This resilience may be due to a less extreme sleep loss than in previous studies, but also indicates that learning components and risk biases should be separated when assessing the effect of sleep loss on risky behaviour.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 9, article id 8554
National Category
Neurosciences Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-170850DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44237-9ISI: 000471215800032PubMedID: 31189964OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-170850DiVA, id: diva2:1338814
Available from: 2019-07-24 Created: 2019-07-24 Last updated: 2022-09-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Sundelin, TinaSchwarz, JohannaAxelsson, John

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sundelin, TinaSchwarz, JohannaAxelsson, John
By organisation
Stress Research Institute
In the same journal
Scientific Reports
NeurosciencesPsychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 235 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf