Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T10:56:05.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regulatory Match Effects on a Modified Wisconsin Card Sort Task

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2010

W. TODD MADDOX ,
J. VINCENT FILOTEO ,
BRIAN D. GLASS  and
ARTHUR B. MARKMAN
W. TODD MADDOX*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas
J. VINCENT FILOTEO
Affiliation:
VA San Diego Healthcare System & University of California, San Diego, California
BRIAN D. GLASS
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas
ARTHUR B. MARKMAN
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: W. Todd Maddox, Department of Psychology, Institute for Neuroscience, 1 University Station, A8000, University of Texas, Austin, Austin, Texas, 78712. E-mail: maddox@psy.utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (WCST; Heaton, 1980) is commonly used to assess concept formation and set shifting. Cognitive research suggests that set shifting performance is enhanced by a match between a person’s regulatory focus (promotion focus: attempting to earn an entry into a cash drawing; prevention focus: attempting to avoid losing an entry into the drawing) and the task reward structure (gains: attempting to maximize points gained; losses: attempting to minimize points lost). A regulatory match results when attempting to earn an entry by maximizing points or attempting to avoid losing an entry by minimizing losses. We test the hypothesis that performance on a modified WCST is accentuated in younger, healthy participants when there is a match between the global performance incentive and the local task reward structure. As predicted, participants in a match showed better set shifting but equivalent initial concept formation when compared with participants in a mismatch. Furthermore, relative to a baseline control group, mismatch participants were significantly worse at set shifting than were participants in a regulatory match. These results suggest that set shifting performance might be impacted by incentive and task reward factors in ways that have not been considered previously. (JINS, 2010, 16, 352–359.)

Keywords

RewardPunishmentExecutive functionMotivationRegulatory fitIncentivesLearning
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , March 2010 , pp. 352 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ashby, F.G., & Maddox, W.T. (2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bechara, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A.R. (2000). Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 295–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruner, J.S., Goodnow, J., & Austin, G. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, S.R., Fineberg, N.A., Blackwell, A.D., Robbins, T.W., & Sahakian, B.J. (2006). Motor inhibition and cognitive flexibility in obsessive-compulsive disorder and trichotillomania. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 1282–1284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Channon, S. (1996). Executive dysfunction in depression: The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Journal of Affective Disorders, 39, 107–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, R.J. (1998). Anterior electrophysiological asymmetries, emotion, and depression: Conceptual and methodological conundrums. Psychophysiology, 35, 607–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delgado, M.R., Stenger, V.A., & Fiez, J.A. (2004). Motivation-dependent responses in the human caudate nucleus. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 1022–1030.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demakis, G.J. (2003). A meta-analytic review of the sensitivity of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test to frontal and lateralized frontal brain damage. Neuropsychology, 17, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, R., Sahakian, B.J., Herrod, J.J., Robbins, T.W., & Paykel, E.S. (1997). Abnormal response to negative feedback in unipolar depression: Evidence for a diagnosis specific impairment. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 63, 74–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estes, W.K. (1994). Classification and cognition. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faure, A., Reynolds, S.M., Richard, J.M., & Berridge, K.C. (2008). Mesolimbic dopamine in desire and dread: Enabling motivation to be generated by localized glutamate disruptions in nucleus accumbens. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 7184–7192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grant, D.A., & Berg, E.A. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigle-type card sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 408–411.Google Scholar
Grimm, L.R., Markman, A.B., Maddox, W.T., & Baldwin, G.C. (2007). Differential effects of regulatory fit on category learning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 920–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, T.A., O’Doherty, J., Camerer, C.F., Schultz, W., & Rangel, A. (2008). Dissociating the role of the orbitofrontal cortex and the striatum in the computation of goal values and prediction errors. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 5623–5630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heaton, R.K. (1980). A manual for the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
Heaton, R.K., Chelune, G.J., Talley, J.L., Kay, G.G., & Curtiss, G. (1993). Wisconsin Card Sorting Test manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
Heaton, R.K., Grant, I., & Matthews, C.G. (1991). Comprehensive norms for an expanded Halstead-Reitan Battery: Demographic corrections, research findings, and clinical applications. Odessa: FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Henriques, J.B., & Davidson, R.J. (2000). Decreased responsiveness to reward in depression. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 711–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, E.T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ilonen, T., Taiminen, T., Lauerma, H., Karlsson, H., Helenius, H.Y., Tuimala, P., et al. . (2000). Impaired Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. performance in first-episode schizophrenia: resource or motivation deficit? Comprehensive Psychiatry, 41, 385–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kongs, S.K., Thompson, L.L., Iverson, G.L., & Heaton, R.K. (2000). WCST-64: Wisconsin Card Sorting Test-64 card version, professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Maddox, W.T., Baldwin, G.C., & Markman, A.B. (2006). A test of the regulatory fit hypothesis in perceptual classification learning. Memory and Cognition, 34, 1377–1397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maddox, W.T., Markman, A.B., & Baldwin, G.C. (2006). Using classification to understand the motivation-learning interface. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 47, 213–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, D.J., Oren, Z., & Boone, K. (1991). Major depressives’ and dysthmics’ performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47, 684–690.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, G.K., Clark, L., Corlett, P.R., Blackwell, A.D., Cools, R., Jones, P.B., et al. . (2008). Incentive motivation in first-episode psychosis: A behavioural study. BMC Psychiatry, 8, 34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, A.G., Vacca, G., & Ahn, S. (2008). A top-down perspective on dopamine, motivation and memory. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior, 90, 236–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pizzagalli, D.A., Nitschke, J.B., Oakes, T.R., Hendrick, A.M., Horras, K.A., Larson, C.L., et al. . (2002). Brain electrical tomography in depression: the importance of symptom severity, anxiety, and melancholic features. Biological Psychiatry, 52, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rahman, S., Robbins, T.W., Hodges, J.R., Mehta, M.A., Nestor, P.J., Clark, L., et al. . (2006). Methylphenidate (‘Ritalin’) can ameliorate abnormal risk-taking behavior in the frontal variant of frontotemporal dementia. Neuropsychopharmacology, 31, 651–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reitan, R.M., & Wolfson, D. (1993). The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsycholigical Test Battery: Theory and clinical interpretation. Tucson, AZ: Neuropsychology Press.Google Scholar
Robbins, T.W. (2007). Shifting and stopping: fronto-striatal substrates, neurochemical modulation and clinical implications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 362, 917–932.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shallice, T. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 298, 199–209.Google ScholarPubMed
Watson, D., Weber, K., Assenheimer, J.S., Clark, L.A., Strauss, M.E., & McCormick, R.A. (1995). Testing a tripartite model: I. Evaluating the convergent and discriminant validity of anxiety and depression symptom scales. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed