Cognitive modifications during ageing can affect decision-making competence (DMC). As this ability is central to the preservation of autonomy, our study aims to investigate how it changes in elderly adults and to determine whether such changes are linked to the deterioration of executive functions and working memory. To this end, 50 young adults and 50 elderly adults were assessed with executive, working memory, and DMC tasks. The latter comprised the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and a scenario task based on situations inspired by everyday life, under conditions of both risk and ambiguity. The results revealed lower performances in old than in young adults for the updating, inhibition, and working memory tasks. The IGT failed to distinguish between the two age groups. However, the scenario task did permit such a distinction, with young adults seeking more risky and ambiguous choices than elderly adults. Moreover, updating and inhibition capacities appeared to influence DMC.
AgustíA. I.SatorresE.PitarqueA.MeléndezJ. C. (2017). An emotional Stroop task with faces and words. A comparison of young and older adults. Consciousness and Cognition, 53, 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.06.010
2.
BarrouilletP.BernardinS.CamosV. (2004). Time Constraints and Resource Sharing in Adults’ Working Memory Spans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.83
3.
BayardS.ErkesJ.MoroniC.GuerdouxE. (2009). Victoria Stroop Test: Normative data in a sample group of older people and the study of their clinical applications in the assessment of inhibition in Alzheimer’s disease. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26, 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acr053
BhererL.BellevilleS.HudonC. (2004). Le déclin des fonctions exécutives au cours du vieillissement normal, dans la maladie d’Alzheimer et dans la démence frontotemporale. Psychologie & NeuroPsychiatrie du vieillissement, 2, Article 9.
6.
BoppK.VerhaeghenP. (2005). Aging and verbal memory span: A meta-analysis. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60(5), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/60.5.P223
7.
BoppK.VerhaeghenP. (2018). Aging and n-Back Performance: A meta-analysis. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 75, 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby024
8.
BrandM.MarkowitschH. J. (2010). Aging and decision-making: A neurocognitive perspective. Gerontology, 56(3), 319–324. https://doi.org/10.1159/000248829
9.
BrandM.RecknorE. C.GrabenhorstF.BecharaA. (2007). Decisions under ambiguity and decisions under risk: Correlations with executive functions and comparisons of two different gambling tasks with implicit and explicit rules. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 29(1), 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390500507196
10.
BrandM.SchiebenerJ. (2013). Interactions of age and cognitive functions in predicting decision making under risky conditions over the life span. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 35(1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2012.740000
11.
BrandM.SchiebenerJ.PertlM.-T.DelazerM. (2014). Know the risk, take the win: How executive functions and probability processing influence advantageous decision making under risk conditions. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 36(9), 914–929. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2014.955783
CabezaR.DaselaarS. M.DolcosF.PrinceS. E.BuddeM.NybergL. (2004). Task-independent and Task-specific age effects on brain activity during working memory, visual attention and episodic retrieval. Cerebral Cortex, 14(4), 364–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhg133
14.
CamosV.BarrouilletP. (2014). Le développement de la mémoire de travail : Perspectives dans le cadre du modèle de partage temporel des ressources. Psychologie Française, 59(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psfr.2012.12.003
15.
Cano-LópezI.Cano-LópezB.HidalgoV.González-BonoE. (2016). Effects of acute stress on decision making under ambiguous and risky conditions in healthy young men. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 19, Article E59. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2016.57
16.
CarstensenL. L.FungH. H.CharlesS. T. (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion, 27(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024569803230
17.
CarstensenL. L.IsaacowitzD. M.CharlesS. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165
18.
ChenP.-Y.ChenC.-L.HsuY.-C.TsengW.-Y. I. (2020). Fluid intelligence is associated with cortical volume and white matter tract integrity within multiple-demand system across adult lifespan. NeuroImage, 212, Article 116576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116576
19.
DeakinJ.AitkenM.RobbinsT.SahakianB. J. (2004). Risk taking during decision-making in normal volunteers changes with age. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10(4), 590–598. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617704104104
20.
DenburgN. L.ColeC. A.HernandezM.YamadaT. H.TranelD.BecharaA.WallaceR. B. (2007). The orbitofrontal cortex, real-world decision making, and normal aging. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1121(1), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1401.031
21.
DiehlM.MarsiskeM.HorgasA. L.RosenbergA.SaczynskiJ. S.WillisS. L. (2005). The Revised Observed Tasks of Daily Living : A Performance-Based Assessment of Everyday Problem Solving in Older Adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 24(3), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464804273772
22.
DrorI. E.KatonaM.MungurK. (1998). Age differences in decision making: To take a risk or not?Gerontology, 44(2), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1159/000021986
23.
DuboisB.SlachevskyA.LitvanI.PillonB. F. A. B. (2000). The FAB: a frontal assessment battery at bedside. Neurology, 55(11), 1621–1626.
24.
FeinG.McgillivrayS.FinnP. (2007). Older adults make less advantageous decisions than younger adults: Cognitive and psychological correlates. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13(3), 480–489. https://doi.org/10.1017/S135561770707052X
25.
FinucaneM. L.SlovicP.HibbardJ. H.PetersE.MertzC. K.MacGregorD. G. (2002). Aging and decision-making competence: An analysis of comprehension and consistency skills in older versus younger adults considering health-plan options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(2), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.407
FriedmanN. P.MiyakeA.YoungS. E.DeFriesJ. C.CorleyR. P.HewittJ. K. (2008). Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(2), 201–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.201
GollierC.HiltonD.RaufasteE. (2003). Daniel Kahneman et l’analyse de la décision face au risque. Revue d’économie politique, 113(3), Article 295. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.133.0295
30.
GutchessA. H.WelshR. C.HeddenT.BangertA.MinearM.LiuL. L.ParkD. C. (2005). Aging and the neural correlates of successful picture encoding: Frontal activations compensate for decreased medial-temporal activity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929052880048
31.
HessT. M.QueenT. L.PattersonT. R. (2012). To deliberate or not to deliberate: Interactions between age, task characteristics, and cognitive activity on decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.711
32.
HessT. M.RosenbergD.WatersS. (2001). Motivation and representation processes in adulthood: The effects of social accountability and information relevance. Psychology and Aging, 16, 629–642. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.16.4.629
33.
Hugonot-DienerL.BarbeauE.MichelB. F.Thomas-AntérionC.RobertP. (2008). GREMOIRE: tests et échelles de la maladie d’Alzheimer et des syndromes apparentés. Marseille: Solal.
34.
JASP Team (2022). JASP (Version 0.14.0.0)[Computer software] is a right citation. We cite as recomended in the software.
35.
JohnsonM. M. S. (1990). Age differences in decision making: A process methodology for examining strategic information processing. Journal of Gerontology, 45(2), P75–P78. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/45.2.P75
KazakA. E. (2018). Editorial: Journal article reporting standards. American Psychologist, 73(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000263
38.
KimS.GoldsteinD.HasherL.ZacksR. T. (2005). Framing effects in younger and older adults. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60(4), P215–P218. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/60.4.P215
39.
LabuddaK.WoermannF. G.MertensM.Pohlmann-EdenB.MarkowitschH. J.BrandM. (2008). Neural correlates of decision making with explicit information about probabilities and incentives in elderly healthy subjects. Experimental Brain Research, 187(4), 641–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1332-x
40.
LauriolaM.LevinI. P. (2001). Relating individual differences in Attitude toward Ambiguity to risky choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14(2), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.368
41.
LauriolaM.LevinI. P.HartS. S. (2007). Common and distinct factors in decision making under ambiguity and risk: A psychometric study of individual differences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.001
42.
LebelC.GeeM.CamicioliR.WielerM.MartinW.BeaulieuC. (2012). Diffusion tensor imaging of white matter tract evolution over the lifespan. NeuroImage, 60(1), 340–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.11.094
43.
LeeT. M. C.LeungA. W. S.FoxP. T.GaoJ.-H.ChanC. C. H. (2008). Age-related differences in neural activities during risk taking as revealed by functional MRI. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsm033
44.
LesieurH. R.BlumeS. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144(9), 1184–1188.
45.
LevyI.SnellJ.NelsonA. J.RustichiniA.GlimcherP. W. (2009). Neural representation of subjective value under risk and ambiguity. Journal of Neurophysiology, 103(2), 1036–1047. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00853.2009
46.
LiD.LiuT.ZhangX.WangM.WangD.ShiJ. (2017). Fluid intelligence, emotional intelligence, and the Iowa Gambling Task in children. Intelligence, 62, 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2017.04.004
47.
LiJ.BiswalB. B.MengY.YangS.DuanX.CuiQ.ChenH.LiaoW. (2020). A neuromarker of individual general fluid intelligence from the white-matter functional connectome. Translational Psychiatry, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-0829-3
48.
LogsdonR. G.GibbonsL. E.McCurryS. M.TeriL. (1999). Quality of life in Alzheimer’s disease: patient and caregiver reports. Journal of Mental health and Aging, 5, 21–32.
49.
MataR.JosefA. K.LemaireP. (2015). Adaptive decision making and aging. In HessT. M.StroughJ.LöckenhoffC. E. (Eds.), Aging and decision making (pp. 105–126). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-417148-0.00006-6
50.
MataR.SchoolerL. J.RieskampJ. (2007). The aging decision maker: Cognitive aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychology and Aging, 22(4), 796–810. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.22.4.796
McCarreyA. C.HenryJ. D.LuszczM. (2010). Potential mechanisms contributing to decision-making difficulties in late adulthood. Gerontology, 56(4), 430–434. https://doi.org/10.1159/000275060
53.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P.EmersonM. J.WitzkiA. H.HowerterA.WagerT. D. (2000). The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex “Frontal Lobe” Tasks : A Latent Variable Analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
54.
NajbergH.WachtlL.AnzianoM.MouthonM.SpiererL. (2021). Aging modulates prefrontal plasticity induced by executive control training. Cerebral Cortex, 31(2), 809–825. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhaa259
55.
NguyenC. M.BarrashJ.KoenigsA. L.BecharaA.TranelD.DenburgN. L. (2013). Decision-making deficits in normal elderly persons associated with executive personality disturbances. International Psychogeriatrics, 25(11), 1811–1819. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610213001270
PertlM.-T.BenkeT.ZamarianL.DelazerM. (2017). Effects of healthy aging and mild cognitive impairment on a Real-Life Decision-Making Task. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 58(4), 1077–1087. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-170119
58.
Rey-MermetA.GadeM. (2018). Inhibition in aging: What is preserved? What declines? A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(5), 1695–1716. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1384-7
59.
RogalskyC.VidalC.LiX.DamasioH. (2012). Risky decision-making in older adults without cognitive deficits: An fMRI study of VMPFC using the Iowa Gambling Task. Social Neuroscience, 7(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2011.588340
60.
RönnlundM.Del MissierF.MäntyläT.CarelliM. G. (2019). The fatalistic decision maker: Time perspective, working memory, and older adults’ decision-making competence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2038. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02038
61.
SchiebenerJ.BrandM. (2015). Decision making under objective risk conditions: A review of cognitive and emotional correlates, strategies, feedback processing, and external influences. Neuropsychology Review, 25(2), 171–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-015-9285-x
62.
SchiebenerJ.BrandM. (2017). Age-related variance in decisions under ambiguity is explained by changes in reasoning, executive functions, and decision-making under risk. Cognition and Emotion, 31(4), 816–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1159944
63.
SchmickerM.MenzeI.KochD.RumpfU.MüllerP.PelzerL.MüllerN. G. (2019). Decision-making deficits in elderly can be alleviated by attention training. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 8(8), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8081131
64.
SprengR. N.TurnerG. R. (2019). The shifting architecture of cognition and brain function in older adulthood. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(4), 523–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619827511
65.
SprotenA. N.DienerC.FiebachC. J.SchwierenC. (2018). Decision making and age: Factors influencing decision making under uncertainty. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 76, 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2018.07.002
66.
StoetG. (2010). PsyToolkit: A software package for programming psychological experiments using Linux. Behavior Research Methods, 42(4), 1096–1104. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.1096
67.
StoetG. (2017). PsyToolkit: A novel web-based method for running online questionnaires and reaction-time experiments. Teaching of Psychology, 44(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628316677643
68.
TannouT.KoeberléS.AubryR.HaffenE. (2020). How does decisional capacity evolve with normal cognitive aging: Systematic review of the literature. European Geriatric Medicine, 11(1), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-019-00251-8
69.
TroyerA. K.LeachL.StraussE. (2006). Aging and response inhibition: Normative data for the Victoria Stroop Test. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 13(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/138255890968187
70.
WoodS.BusemeyerJ.KolingA.CoxC. R.DavisH. (2005). Older adults as adaptive decision makers: Evidence from the Iowa Gambling Task. Psychology and Aging, 20(2), 220–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.20.2.220
71.
ZamarianL.SinzH.BonattiE.GambozN.DelazerM. (2008). Normal aging affects decisions under ambiguity, but not decisions under risk. Neuropsychology, 22(5), 645–657. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.22.5.645
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
