Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of phantom decoys on the neural processing of valuation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Brain Structure and Function Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rational decision theories posit that good choices should be based solely on information that is relevant to the choice at hand. However, introducing an inferior option that would never be chosen can influence choices among other relevant options, known as decoy effect. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) combined with a simple gambling task to investigate the neural signature of decision-making in or against the influence of the decoy effect in inferior and superior phantom decoy conditions. The fMRI results show that compared with choosing against the influence of the dominated phantom inferior option, choosing in the influence of the same option was associated with stronger activation in bilateral caudate and weaker functional connectivity between the left ventral anterior cingulate cortex (vACC) and the left caudate. Phantom inferior effect selectively enhanced the connectivity from the caudate to the vACC but not vice versa. Choosing in the influence of the dominated phantom superior option engaged greater activity in the left dorsal ACC and stronger functional connectivity between the left dACC and bilateral anterior insula. Furthermore, the direction of the phantom superior effect was restricted from left dACC to the anterior insula, but not vice versa. Our findings suggest that a phantom inferior decoy may boost the value of the target via the reward network, whereas a phantom superior decoy may diminish the value of the target option via the aversion network. Our study provides neural evidence to support that valuation is context dependent and delineates differential neural networks underlying the influence of unavailable inferior and superior decoy options on our decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahn H, Novoa NV (2016) The decoy effect in relative performance evaluation and the debiasing role of DEA. Eur J Oper Res 249(3):959–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balleine BW, Delgado MR, Hikosaka O (2007) The role of the dorsal striatum in reward and decision-making. J Neurosci 27(31):8161–8165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer JR, Gluth S, Rieskamp J, Turner BM (2019) Cognitive and neural bases of multi-attribute, multi-alternative, value-based decisions. Trends Cogn Sci 23(3):251–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cauda F, Costa T, Torta DM, Sacco K, D'Agata F, Duca S, Geminiani G, Fox PT, Vercelli A (2012) Meta-analytic clustering of the insular cortex: characterizing the meta-analytic connectivity of the insula when involved in active tasks. Neuroimage 62(1):343–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang LJ, Yarkoni T, Khaw MW, Sanfey AG (2013) Decoding the role of the insula in human cognition: functional parcellation and large-scale reverse inference. Cereb Cortex 23(3):739–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chau BK, Kolling N, Hunt LT, Walton ME, Rushworth MF (2014) A neural mechanism underlying failure of optimal choice with multiple alternatives. Nat Neurosci 17(3):463

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chung HK, Sjöström T, Lee HJ, Lu YT, Tsuo FY, Chen TS, Chang CF, Juan CH, Kuo WJ, Huang CY (2017) Why Do Irrelevant Alternatives Matter? An fMRI-TMS Study of Context-Dependent Preferences. J Neurosci 37(48):11647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ewbank MP, Lawson RP, Henson RN, Rowe JB, Passamonti L, Calder AJ (2011) Changes in “top-down” connectivity underlie repetition suppression in the ventral visual pathway. J Neurosci 31(15):5635–5642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Farmer GD, Warren PA, El-Deredy W, Howes A (2017) The effect of expected value on attraction effect preference reversals. J Behav Decis Mak 30(4):785–793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friston KJ, Buechel C, Fink GR, Morris J, Rolls E, Dolan RJ (1997) Psychophysiological and modulatory interactions in neuroimaging. Neuroimage 6(3):218–229

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Friston KJ, Harrison L, Penny W (2003) Dynamic causal modelling. Neuroimage 19(4):1273–1302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gandolla M, Ferrante S, Molteni F, Guanziroli E, Frattini T, Martegani A, Ferrigno G, Friston K, Pedrocchi A, Ward NS (2014) Re-thinking the role of motor cortex: context-sensitive motor outputs? Neuroimage 91(100):366–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge X, Messinger PR, Li J (2009) Influence of soldout products on consumer choice. J Retail 85(3):274–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gläscher J, Adolphs R, Damasio H, Bechara A, Rudrauf D, Calamia M, Paul LK, Tranel D (2012) Lesion mapping of cognitive control and value-based decision making in the prefrontal cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(36):14681–14686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gluth S, Hotaling JM, Rieskamp J (2017) The attraction effect modulates reward prediction errors and intertemporal choices. J Neurosci 37(2):371–382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hampshire A, Chamberlain SR, Monti MM, Duncan J, Owen AM (2010) The role of the right inferior frontal gyrus: inhibition and attentional control. Neuroimage 50(3):1313–1319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.109

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hedgcock W, Rao AR (2009) Trade-off aversion as an explanation for the attraction effect: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Mark Res 46(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu J, Yu R (2014) The neural correlates of the decoy effect in decisions. Front Behav Neurosci 8:271

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Huber J, Payne JW, Puto C (1982) Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J Consum Res 9(1):90–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt LT, Dolan RJ, Behrens TE (2014) Hierarchical competitions subserving multi-attribute choice. Nat Neurosci 17(11):1613

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jung Y-C, Schulte T, Müller-Oehring EM, Hawkes W, Namkoong K, Pfefferbaum A, Sullivan EV (2014) Synchrony of anterior cingulate cortex and insular-striatal activation predicts ambiguity aversion in individuals with low impulsivity. Cereb Cortex 24(5):1397–1408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner M, Hager OM, Bischof M, Hartmann-Riemer MN, Kluge A, Seifritz E, Tobler PN, Kaiser S (2016) Deficits in context-dependent adaptive coding of reward in schizophrenia. NPJ schizophrenia 2:16020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li V, Michael E, Balaguer J, Castañón SH, Summerfield C (2018) Gain control explains the effect of distraction in human perceptual, cognitive, and economic decision making. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115(38):E8825–E8834

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luce RD (2012) Individual choice behavior: a theoretical analysis. Dover Publications, Mineola, NY (Original work published 1959)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr PN, Heekeren HR, Rieskamp J (2017) attraction effect in risky choice can be explained by subjective distance between choice alternatives. Sci Rep 7(1):8942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passamonti L, Rowe JB, Ewbank M, Hampshire A, Keane J, Calder AJ (2008) Connectivity from the ventral anterior cingulate to the amygdala is modulated by appetitive motivation in response to facial signals of aggression. Neuroimage 43(3):562–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penny WD, Stephan KE, Mechelli A, Friston KJ (2004) Comparing dynamic causal models. Neuroimage 22(3):1157–1172

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pratkanis AR, Farquhar PH (1992) A brief history of research on phantom alternatives: evidence for seven empirical generalizations about phantoms. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 13(1):103–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothkirch I, Granert O, Knutzen A, Wolff S, Gövert F, Pedersen A, Zeuner KE, Witt K (2018) Dynamic causal modeling revealed dysfunctional effective connectivity in both, the cortico-basal-ganglia and the cerebello-cortical motor network in writers’ cramp. Neuroimage Clinical 18:149–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan KE, Penny WD, Daunizeau J, Moran RJ, Friston KJ (2009) Bayesian model selection for group studies. Neuroimage 46(4):1004–1017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swick D, Ashley V, Turken U (2011) Are the neural correlates of stopping and not going identical? Quantitative meta-analysis of two response inhibition tasks. Neuroimage 56(3):1655–1665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueblood JS (2012) Multialternative context effects obtained using an inference task. Psychon Bull Rev 19(5):962–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueblood JS, Brown SD, Heathcote A, Busemeyer JR (2013) Not just for consumers: context effects are fundamental to decision making. Psychol Sci 24(6):901–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueblood JS, Pettibone JC (2017) The phantom decoy effect in perceptual decision making. J Behav Decis Mak 30(2):157–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsetsos K, Chater N, Usher M (2012) Salience driven value integration explains decision biases and preference reversal. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(24):9659–9664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner BM, Forstmann BU, Love BC, Palmeri TJ, Van Maanen L (2017) Approaches to analysis in model-based cognitive neuroscience. J Math Psychol 76:65–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tzourio-Mazoyer N, Landeau B, Papathanassiou D, Crivello F, Etard O, Delcroix N, Mazoyer B, Joliot M (2002) Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain. Neuroimage 15(1):273–289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Woo CW, Koban L, Kross E, Lindquist MA, Banich MT, Ruzic L, Andrews-Hanna JR, Wager TD (2014) Separate neural representations for physical pain and social rejection. Nat Commun 5:5380. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6380

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Yaple ZA, Yu R (2019) Fractionating adaptive learning: A meta-analysis of the reversal learning paradigm. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 102:85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.04.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yu R, Zhou X (2009) To bet or not to bet? The error negativity or error-related negativity associated with risk-taking choices. J Cogn Neurosci 21(4):684–696. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application and Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science of Guangdong Province, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China

    Shuyi Wu

  2. Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, Block AS4, 02-17, 9 Arts Link, Singapore, 117570, Singapore

    Rongjun Yu

Authors
  1. Shuyi Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rongjun Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rongjun Yu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Review Board, in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

All participants gave written informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Table S1 (DOCX 23 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, S., Yu, R. The impact of phantom decoys on the neural processing of valuation. Brain Struct Funct 225, 1523–1535 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-020-02079-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-020-02079-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation