Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.55> Article
Research Article

Risk Decision and Social Comparison in Gambling among Non-gamblers and Gambling Disorder Patients

Zushen WangAnhui Medical University* Sebastian MaoUniversity of Macau Xuanyu LiWenzhou-Kean University Ruofan HuAnhui Medical University

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Previous studies have supported the view that gambling disorder is associated with impaired decision-making. While scholars try to explain it through neurobiological approaches, this study aims to investigate different explanations from the perspective of evolutionary psychology. Our research will mainly focus on the underlying malfunction of risk sensitivity mechanism and effect of social comparison. Participants consist of non-disordered people and gambling disorder patients selected from volunteers and patients from hospital. There are two different situations (visible and invisible) to identify the impact of social comparison. Participants are supposed to choose different risk levels to get higher scores. The expected result of this experiment will be under the combined influence of the mechanism malfunction and social comparison. For gambling disorder patients, the malfunction of risk sensitivity mechanism will lead to an extreme preference for high risk and scores, while non-gamblers will stop or choose a low risk level after obtaining enough or a high score. Affected by social comparison, both kinds of participants will manifest a tendency for higher risk. This study will contribute to explaining differential performance between individuals with gambling disorders and non-gamblers in the gambling scenario through the theory of evolutionary psychology.

Keywords: Evolutionary Psychology; Gambling Disorder; Risk-sensitivity Decision-making; Social Comparison
Published: February 21, 2025
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2024.21048
Volume: CHR Vol.55
pp. 34-41
Download PDF

References

  1. GRAY P B. Evolutionary and cross-cultural perspectives on gambling [J]. Journal of Gambling Studies, 2004, 20: 347-71.
  2. MAZZONI A, ROSA M, CARPANETO J, et al. Subthalamic Neural Activity Patterns Anticipate Economic Risk Decisions in Gambling [J]. eNeuro, 2018, 5(1).
  3. GLICKSOHN J, ZILBERMAN N. Gambling on individual differences in decision making [J]. Personality and Individual Differences, 2010, 48(5): 557-62.
  4. BRAND M, KALBE E, LABUDDA K, et al. Decision-making impairments in patients with pathological gambling [J]. Psychiatry Res, 2005, 133(1): 91-9.
  5. LEDA COSMIDES J T. Evolutionary Psychology: A Primer [J]. Evolutionary Psychology A Primer, 1997.
  6. HINTZE A, OLSON R S, ADAMI C, et al. Risk sensitivity as an evolutionary adaptation [J]. Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 8242.
  7. MISHRA S. Decision-Making Under Risk: Integrating Perspectives From Biology, Economics, and Psychology [J]. Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 2014, 18(3): 280-307.
  8. CARACO T, MARTINDALE S, WHITTAM T S. An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences [J]. Animal Behaviour, 1980, 28(3): 820-30.
  9. BATESON M. Recent advances in our understanding of risk-sensitive foraging preferences [J]. Proc Nutr Soc, 2002, 61(4): 509-16.
  10. GILOVICH T, VALLONE R, TVERSKY A. The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences [J]. Cognitive psychology, 1985, 17(3): 295-314.
  11. WILKE A, BARRETT H C. The hot hand phenomenon as a cognitive adaptation to clumped resources [J]. Evolution and Human Behavior, 2009, 30(3): 161-9.
  12. FESTINGER L. A theory of social comparison processes [J]. Human relations, 1954, 7(2): 117-40.
  13. WILLS, THOMAS A. Downward Comparison Principles in Social Psychology, [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 1981, 90(2): 245-71.
  14. TESSER A, MILLAR M, MOORE J. Some affective consequences of social comparison and reflection processes: the pain and pleasure of being close [J]. J Pers Soc Psychol, 1988, 54(1): 49-61.
  15. COLLINS, REBECCA L. For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations [J]. Psychological Bulletin, 1996, 119(1): 51-69.
  16. REGE M. Why do people care about social status? [J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2008, 66(2): 233-42.
  17. KRMPOTICH T, MIKULICH-GILBERTSON S, SAKAI J, et al. Impaired Decision-Making, Higher Impulsivity, and Drug Severity in Substance Dependence and Pathological Gambling [J]. J Addict Med, 2015, 9(4): 273-80.
  18. POTENZA M N. The neural bases of cognitive processes in gambling disorder [J]. Trends Cogn Sci, 2014, 18(8): 429-38.
  19. POTENZA M N. How central is dopamine to pathological gambling or gambling disorder? [J]. Front Behav Neurosci, 2013, 7: 206.
  20. BECHARA A, DAMASIO A R, DAMASIO H, et al. Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex [J]. Cognition, 1994, 50(1-3): 7-15.