Aging and Decision-Making 1

With Age Comes Wisdom: Decision-Making in Younger and Older Adults

Darrell A. Worthy1

Marissa A. Gorlick2,

Jennifer L. Pacheco2,

David M. Schnyer2,

& W. Todd Maddox2

1
Texas A&M University
2
University of Texas at Austin

Psychological Science (in press)

Abstract

In two experiments younger and older adults performed decision-making tasks where
reward values available were either independent or dependent of the previous sequence of
choices made. The choice independent task involved learning and exploiting the options
that gave the highest rewards on each trial. In this task the stability of the expected
rewards for each option was not influenced by the choices participants made. The
choice-dependent task involved learning how each choice influenced the rewards
available for both options on future trials and making the best decisions based on that
knowledge. Younger adults performed better when rewards were choice-independent,
while older adults performed better when rewards were choice-dependent. This suggests
a fundamental difference in the way in which younger and older adults approach
decision-making situations. We discuss the results within the context of prominent
decision-making theories, and offer possible explanations based on neurobiological and
behavioral changes associated with aging.
Aging and Decision-Making 2

Decisions are a pervasive part of our lives. The importance and impact of our
decisions may only increase with age. Older adults often continue to work in prominent
positions, and face numerous important decisions such as which retirement options to
select, how to spend their life-savings, and how to best live out the remaining years of
life. Likewise, younger adults must choose which career path to take, which college to
attend, and when to buy a house. It is thus critical to understand how age affects
decision-making strategies.
Decisions rarely stand alone. Often the rewards available from each option
depend on previous choices. The current job prospects or retirement investments
available are dependent on the current state that one has reached. One cannot apply for
various teaching jobs if one did not first decide to attend college. Likewise, one cannot
decide where to buy a retirement home if one did not first take steps to ensure a
productive career that allowed adequate accumulation of retirement savings. Thus, in
many real world contexts our present choices often determine our future possibilities.
However, many previous studies that have examined how age affects decision-
making have focused on performance in tasks where the rewards available on a given
trial are independent of the sequence of previous choices. For example, the probabilities
of obtaining rewards of varying amounts on any given trial are often pre-determined by
the experimenter and do not change based on what decisions the participant makes . This
is true for tasks like the Iowa Gambling task (Denburg et al., 2005), the Behavioral
Investment Allocation Strategy task (Kuhnen & Knutson, 2005; Samanez-Larkin,
Kuhnen, Yoo, and Knutson, 2010), the Monetary Incentive Delay task (Samanez-Larkin,
Hollon, Carstensen, & Knutson, 2007), and the Probabilistic Object Reversal Task (Mell,
Heekeren, Marschner, Wartenburger, Villringer, & Reisches, 2009; Mell, Heekeren,
Marschner, Wartenburger, Villringer, & Reisches, 2005). A common finding in these
tasks is poorer or, at a minimum, equivalent performance for older adults compared to
younger adults.
However, one should ponder why older adults, who have a vast reserve of
decision-making experience to draw upon, often perform worse, and rarely perform better
than younger adults in decision-making tasks (Peters, Hess, Vastfjall, & Auman, 2007;
Agarwal, Driscoll, Gabaix, & Laibson, in press). It may be the case that age-based neural
declines are so great in older adults that their advantage in decision-making experience,
relative to younger adults, cannot be compensated for. An alternative possibility is that
the tasks often used to assess age-based effects on decision-making are biased toward the
strengths of younger adults (Henninger, Madden, & Huettel, 2010), and older adults’
abilities may be better suited for situations that require higher-order processing of
relational dependencies between the sequence of recent choices and the rewards currently
available in the environment (Grossman, Na, Varnum, Park, Kitayama, & Nisbett, 2010;
Blanchard-Fields, 2007). These situations, where reward values are choice-dependent,
may have greater ecological validity in that the options available to us usually depend on
the choices we have made previously.
Recently, a distinction has emerged in the decision-making literature between
model-based and model-free reinforcement learning systems (Glascher, Daw, Dayan, &
O’Doherty, 2010). The model-based system learns a cognitive map of the environment
that describes how different options and their associated rewards are connected to one
another. The system makes decisions by mentally simulating how one decision will
Aging and Decision-Making 3

possibly impact future decisions similar to how a chess player decides the best move
based on how it will affect future possibilities. In contrast, the model-free system learns
the values associated with each choice directly without building an explicit model of the
environment.
These systems are neurally dissociable. The model-based system is mediated by
areas such as the intraparietal sulcus and lateral prefrontal cortex, while the model-free
system is mediated by the ventral striatum (Glascher et al., 2010). Interestingly, a recent
study found that younger adults recruit the ventral striatum more than older adults after
reward expectancies have been learned, while older adults recruit the dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex more than younger adults (Mell et al., 2009). One reasonable
proposition stemming from this work is that increases in age are associated with a shift in
the neural areas that are recruited for decision-making purposes (Park & Reuter-Lorenz,
2009; Cabeza, Anderson, Locantore, & McIntosh, 2002; Phillips & Andres, 2010). Older
adults may recruit more frontal areas, and make decisions in a more model-based manner,
while younger adults may rely on striatal areas and engage in more model-free decision-
making.
The two systems may be better-suited for solving tasks based on whether the
rewards are choice-independent or choice-dependent. Younger adults may make better
decisions when rewards are choice-independent, where the rewards available are not
influenced by previous choices made, whereas older adults may make better decisions
when rewards are choice-dependent, where the rewards available are a function of the
previous choices made. Of course one could also predict that neural declines in
prefrontal areas (West, 1996) will cause older adults to perform worse on choice-
dependent tasks which require identification of the higher order relationship between
choices and available future reward values.
We test our hypothesis that older adults engage in more model-based decision-
making in two experiments where older and younger adults perform either choice-
dependent or choice-independent tasks. In Experiment 1 participants perform a choice
independent task where the reward values available for each option are arbitrarily based
on the trial number and are not impacted by previous behavior. In Experiment 2
participants perform one of two versions of a choice dependent task. In this task the
rewards available for each option are dependent on the number of times one option, the
Increasing option, has been selected over the previous ten trials. As its name implies, the
Increasing option causes the reward values for both options to increase on future trials.
However, the other option, the Decreasing option, gives a higher reward than the
Increasing option on any given trial, but selecting this option causes the rewards for both
options to decrease on future trials. Thus the choice-dependent task involves learning the
trade-off between the short-term benefits of the Decreasing option and the long-term
benefits of the Increasing option, whereas no such trade-off must be learned in the
choice-independent task.
Experiment 1

Participants completed a decision-making task where the best strategy was to select the
option that gave the highest reward on each trial. The rewards given on each trial are
shown in Figure 1. There were a total of four options that participants selected from on
each of 80 trials. Two options, the ‘A’ decks, gave the same reward on each trial, and the
other two options, the ‘B’ decks, gave the same reward on each trial. The B decks gave
Aging and Decision-Making 4

higher rewards during the first 50 trials. After 50 trials there was an arbitrary (choice-
independent) switch and the ‘A’ decks gave the highest rewards on each trial.

Figure 1. Rewards given for each deck during Experiment 1. Rewards were choice independent in that
they were based only on the trial number, and did not change based on the choices participants made.
There were four decks, two ‘A’ decks and two ‘B’ decks that were yoked so they gave the same reward on
any given trial.

Methods
Participants
28 older adults (60-84 years of age M=68.55; 10 male and 18 female; Mean
education = 17.28 years) from the greater Austin community, and 28 Younger adults (18-
23 years of age, M=20.29; 9 male and 19 female; Mean education = 15.34 years) from
the University of Texas community were paid $10 per hour for participating. Older adults
were administered an extensive neuropsychological testing battery to determine any
mental declines not due to normal aging (see Supplementary material)1.
Materials and Procedure
The experiment was performed on a PC using Matlab software. Participants were
told that they would select from one of four decks of cards on each trial, and that they
would receive between 1 and 10 points for each selection. The decks used in this
experiment were a four-deck version of a task used in a previous paper from our lab
(Worthy, Maddox, & Markman, 2007, Experiment 2). The reward structure was
modified from a two-deck to a four-deck version by adding one of each type of deck.

1
We did not observe any significant correlations between neuropsychological test scores and performance
measures in Experiment 1. However, for Experiment 2 we found that fewer errors and perseverative errors
on the WCST were associated with more points earned in the task (see Supplementary Material).
Aging and Decision-Making 5

Participants were given a goal to try to earn at least 550 points by the end of the
experiment (See supplementary material for full instructions). They were told nothing
about the rewards associated with each option. To reach this goal, participants had to
select the best option on about 90% of trials.
Results
Figure 2 shows the average points earned for participants in each condition. We
conducted an independent samples t-test for points earned by younger and older adults.
Younger adults (M=522, SD=22.50) earned significantly more points than older adults
(M=506, SD=31.60), t(54)= -2.17, p<.05.

Figure 2. Total points earned in the choice independent task of Experiment 1. Error bars represent 95%
confidence intervals.

Discussion
The results support part of our hypothesis that younger adults will outperform
older adults on choice-independent tasks. To test the other half of our hypothesis, that
older adults will outperform younger adults on choice-dependent tasks, we had younger
and older adults perform two variants of a choice-dependent task in Experiment 2.
Experiment 2
Participants performed one of two variants of a dynamic decision-making task
where reward values are dependent on the sequence of previous choices. (Gureckis &
Love, 2009; Bogacz, McClure, Li, Cohen, & Montague, 2007; Otto, Gureckis, Markman,
& Love, 2009). Figure 3 shows reward structures for each task. There are two options, a
Decreasing option and an Increasing option. The Decreasing option gives a higher
reward on any given trial; however, the rewards available for both increase as the
Increasing option is chosen more frequently. Selecting the Increasing option moves
participants to the right on the x-axes in Figure 3 (rewards increase), whereas the
opposite is true for the Decreasing option (rewards decrease). Reward values for both
options thus depend on how often each option has been chosen recently. This is the key
difference from Experiment 1.
Aging and Decision-Making 6

Figure 3. Rewards given for each task as a function of the number of the number of Increasing option
selections over the previous ten trials. Participants had to juxtapose the short-term benefit of selecting the
Decreasing option with the long-term benefit of selecting the Increasing option, and then choose the reward
that was optimal for the task. (a.) Rewards given for the Increasing-optimal task. Selecting the Increasing
option 10 consecutive times will lead to a reward of 80 points on each trial, whereas selecting the
Decreasing option 10 consecutive times will lead to a reward of 40 points on each trial. (b.) Rewards given
for the Decreasing-optimal task. Selecting the Decreasing option 10 consecutive times will lead to a
reward of 65 points on each trial, whereas selecting the Increasing option 10 consecutive times will lead to
a reward of 55 points on each trial.
Aging and Decision-Making 7

We vary the optimal strategy between the two versions of the task. Figure 3a
shows the reward structure for the Increasing-optimal task. The Increasing option is the
optimal choice on each trial because repeatedly selecting it will allow participants to gain
the greatest reward for the Increasing option (80 points), while repeatedly selecting the
Decreasing option will lead to a much smaller reward (40 points). Figure 3b shows the
reward structure for the Decreasing-optimal task. Here the Decreasing option gives a
much larger reward. In this case the gain from repeatedly selecting the Increasing option
cannot make up the difference. To solve each of these tasks participants must gain an
understanding of the underlying reward structure in the environment.
Methods
Participants
52 older adults (Average age = 67.51; Range = 60-82) and 51 younger adults (Average
age = 20.35; Range = 18-26) participated in the experiment for monetary compensation.
We used the same neuropsychological testing procedure from Experiment 1 (see
Supplementary Material).

Figure 4. Sample screen shot from the experiment. Participants were given a cover story where they were
asked to test two oxygen-extraction systems on the Martian landscape. The oxygen extracted on each trial
was shown in the “Current” tank and then transferred to the “Cumulative” tank.

Materials and Procedure

Participants were given a hypothetical scenario where they would be testing two
oxygen extraction systems on Mars.2 Figure 4 shows a sample screenshot from the
experiment. Participants were told that they would repeatedly test one of the two systems

2
We use a different decision-making scenario from Experiment 1 because we wanted to follow the
procedure used previously for each task (e.g. Worthy et al., 2007 for Experiment 1; Otto et al., 2009).
While it is possible that the different scenarios affected behavior in younger or older adults, we feel that the
differences in the structure of the rewards had a much bigger impact on decision-making behavior.
Aging and Decision-Making 8

(A or B) and a bar, representing a small oxygen tank, would show the amount of oxygen
they had just extracted. The oxygen would then be moved into the larger tank and the
next trial would begin. A line on the larger tank corresponded to the amount of oxygen
needed to sustain life on Mars. Participants were given the goal of trying to collect this
amount of oxygen over the course of the experiment. The goal lines were set at the
equivalent of 16,000 points for the Increasing-optimal task and 13,000 points for the
Decreasing-optimal task. This corresponded to selecting the optimal choice in each task
on roughly 80% of trials. Participants performed a total of 250 trials. They were told
nothing about the rewards available for each option or the choice-dependent structure of
the rewards.
Results
We first examined the proportion of Increasing option selections in each block
(Figure 5a). We conducted a 2 (Age) X 2 (Task-Type) X 5 (Block) repeated measures
ANOVA on the number of Increasing options selected in the experiment. There was a
significant Age X Task-Type Interaction, F(1,100)=8.08, p<.01, η2=.18. There was also
a significant main effect of block, F(4)=9,02, p<.001, η2=.08, and Task-Type,
F(1,100)=21.56, p<.001, η2=.18. The Block X Task-Type interaction was also
significant, F(4,97)=7.89, p<.001, η2=.07. We conducted pair-wise comparisons within
each age group to examine the locus of the Age X Task-Type interaction. Older adults
selected the Increasing option significantly more often when performing the Increasing-
optimal task (M=.56) 3 than when performing the Decreasing-optimal task (M=.24),
F(1,51)=40.82, p<.001, η2=.45. However, there was no statistical difference in the
proportion of increasing option selections for younger adults between the two tasks
(Increasing-optimal task M=.48; Decreasing-optimal task M=.40), F(1,49)=1.21, p>.10.
Thus, older adults’ performance was more consistent with the optimal strategy across
both tasks.
We next conducted a 2 (Age) X 2 (Task-Type) ANOVA on the total number of points
earned throughout the experiment (Figure 5b). There was a significant effect of Age,
F(1,100)=4.80, p<.05, η2=.05. Older adults earned more points than younger adults on
both the Increasing-optimal task (Older M=15,614.26; Younger M=14,776.60) and the
Decreasing-optimal task (Older M=15,738.46; Younger M=15,286.15).

3
Means are collapsed across all blocks.
Aging and Decision-Making 9

a.

b.

Figure 5. (a.) Proportion of Increasing option selections for participants in each age-task-variant group.
Selecting the Increasing option led to a larger cumulative gain in points in the Increasing-Optimal task,
while selecting the Decreasing option led to a larger cumulative gain in points in the Decreasing optimal
task. (b.) Total points earned for participants in each age-task-variant group. Error bars represent 95%
confidence intervals.
Aging and Decision-Making 10

General Discussion
Previous research suggests an age-related deficit in decision-making, whereas
Experiment 2 of the current study suggests an age-related advantage. This discrepancy
appears to be due to differences in the choice-reward contingencies, with previous
research, and our first Experiment, often focusing on choice-independent conditions
(Denburg et al., 2005; Mell et al., 2009), and Experiment 2 of the current study focusing
on choice-dependent-conditions. Optimal performance in Experiment 2 required holistic
learning of the reward structure rather than simple computation of relative reward values
for each option, as in Experiment 1. We interpret these findings as evidence for
fundamentally different approaches to decision-making problems between older and
younger adults. Older adults likely performed best because they developed specific
hypotheses about how rewards in the environment were structured. This allowed them to
adaptively respond to the reward environment and to appropriately weigh the strengths
and weaknesses of each option. In contrast, younger adults likely performed best in
Experiment 1 because they were more efficient in identifying the choices that gave the
highest rewards, but performed worse in Experiment 2 because they were slower to
develop specific hypotheses about how rewards in the environment were structured. The
fact that the proportion of increasing option selections in Experiment 2 was strongly
affected by the reward structure for older adults but not for younger adults supports this
hypothesis.
This work supports the neural scaffolding hypothesis of aging (Park et al., 2009;
Phillips & Andres, 2010) in that older adults appear to have engaged in more frontally
mediated, model-based decision-making, while younger adults showed more evidence of
striatally mediated, model-free decision-making. In real-world situations it is likely more
common that the rewards available depend on previous choices made, similar to
Experiment 2. The advantage found for older adults in this experiment may have been
partially due to age-based expertise in decision-making situations where current decisions
will impact future possible outcomes (Masunga & Horn, 2001). While aging may lead to
some cognitive declines, it may also lead to gains in the insight and wisdom used to make
the best decisions.
Aging and Decision-Making 11

Author Note
This research was supported by NIMH grant MH077708 to WTM. We thank Tanya
Chotibut, Bo Zhu, Brittany Nix, Devon Greer and other members of the Maddox Lab for
their help with data collection, and A. Ross Otto for valuable comments.
Aging and Decision-Making 12

References
Agarwal, S., Driscoll, J.C., Gabaix, X., Laibson, D. (2009). The age of reason: Financial
decisions over the life-cycle and implications for regulation. Brookings Papers on
Economic Activity, 2, 51-117.
Backman, L., Nyberg, L., Lindenberger, U., Li, S. C., & Farde, L. (2006). The
correlative triad among aging, dopamine, and cognition: Current status and future
prospects. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 791-807.
Blanchard-Fields, F. (2007). Everyday problem solving and emotion: An Adult
Developmental Perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 26-
31.
Bogacz, R., McClure, S. M., Li, J., Cohen, J. D., & Montague, P. R. (2007). Short-term
memory traces for action bias in human reinforcement learning. Brain Research,
1153, 111-121.
Cabeza, R., Anderson, N.D., Locantore, J.K., McIntosh, A.R. (2002). Aging gracefully:
Compensatory brain activity in high-performing older adults. NeuroImage, 17,
1394-1402.
Daw, N. D., O’Doherty, J. P., Dayan, P., Seymour, B. & Dolan, R. J. (2006). Cortical
substrates for exploratory decisions in humans. Nature, 441, 876–879.
Denburg, N. L., Tranel, D., & Bechara, A. (2005). The ability to decide advantageously
declines prematurely in some normal older persons. Neuropsychologia, 43, 1099-
1106.
Glascher, J., Daw, N., Dayan, P., O’Doherty, J. P. (2010). States versus rewards:
Dissociable neural prediction error signals underlying model-based and model-
free reinforcement learning. Neuron, 66, 585-595.
Grossman, I., Na, J., Varnum, M.E., Park., D.C., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R.E. (2010).
Reasoning about social conflicts improves into old age. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 107, 7246-7250.
Gureckis, T. M., & Love, B. C. (2009). Short-term gains, long-term pains: How cues
about state aid learning in dynamic environments. Cognition, 113, 293-313.
Henninger, D.E., Madden, D.J., & Huettel, S.A. (2010). Processing speed and memory
mediate age-related differences in decision-making. Psychology and Aging, 25,
262-270.
Kuhnen, C. M., & Knutson, B. (2005). The neural basis of financial risk-taking. Neuron,
47, 763-770.
Li, S. C., Biele G., Lindenberger, U., & Sikstrom, S. (2001). Aging cognition: from
neuromodulation to representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 97-111.
Masunga, H., & Horn, J. (2001). Expertise and age-related changes in components of
intelligence. Psychology and Aging, 16, 293-311.
Mell, T., Heekeren, H.R., Marschner, A., Wartenburger, I., Villringer, A., & Reischies,
F.M. (2005). Effects of aging on stimulus-reward association learning.
Neuropsychologia, 43, 554-563.
Mell, T., Wartenburger, I., Marschner, A., Villringer, A., Reischies, F.M., & Heekeren,
H. R. (2009). Altered function of ventral striatum during reward-based decision-
making in old age. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 3, 1-10.
Aging and Decision-Making 13

Otto, A. R., Gureckis, T. M., Markman, A. B., & Love, B. C. (2009). Navigating through
Abstract Decision Spaces: Evaluating the Role of State Generalization in a
Dynamic Decision-Making Task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 957-963.
Park, D.C., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (2009). The adaptive brain: Aging and neurocognitive
scaffolding. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 173-196.
Peters, E., Hess, T.M., Vastfjall, D., & Auman, C. (2007). Adult age differences in dual
information processes. Perspective on Psychological Science, 2, 1-23.
Phillips, L.H., & Andres, P. (2010). The cognitive neuroscience of aging: New findings
on compensation and connectivity. Cortex, 46, 421-424.
Samanez-Larkin, G. R., Gibbs, S. E. B., Khanna, K., Nielsen, L., Carstensen, L. L., &
Knutson, B. (2007). Anticipation of monetary gain bus not loss in healthy older
adults. Nature Neuroscience, 10, 787-791.
Samanez-Larkin, G. R., Kuhnen, C. K., Yoo, D. J., & Knutson, B. (2010). Variability in
nucleus accumbens activity mediates age-related suboptimal financial risk-taking.
The Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 1426-1434.
Samejima, K., & Doya, K. (2007). Multiple representations of belief states and action
values in corticobasal loops. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,1104,
213-228.
Schott, B.H., Niehaus, L., Wittmann, B.C., Schutze, H., Seidenbacher, C.I.., Heinze, H.J.,
& Duzel, E. (2007). Ageing and early-stage Parkinson’s disease affect separable
neural mechanisms of mesolimbic reward processing. Brain, 130, 2412-2424.
West, R.L. (1996). An application of prefrontal cortex function theory to cognitive aging.
Psychological Bulletin, 120, 272-292.
Worthy, D.A., Maddox, W.T., & Markman, A.B. (2007) Regulatory fit effects in a choice
task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 1125-1137.
Aging and Decision-Making 14

Supplementary Material

Full Instructions for Experiment 1

Before beginning the task participants read the following instructions:

You will perform a gambling task where you will be asked to make selections
from one of four options. After each selection you will gain a certain number of
points. Your objective is to gain as many points as possible. You will have a
specific goal to earn a certain number of points by the end of the task. When you
begin the task your goal will be listed on the screen. Try your best to earn as many
points as possible.

Four decks will appear on the screen. You will use the 'W', 'Z', 'P’, and ‘?/' keys
to pick from these decks.
Press the 'W' key to pick from the deck on the top left.
Press the 'Z' key to pick from the deck on the bottom left.
Press the 'P' key to pick from the deck on the top right.
Press the '?/' key to pick from the deck on the bottom right.
You will receive between 1 and 10 points each time you draw a card. Your goal
is to earn at least 550 points by the end of the task.
Aging and Decision-Making 15

Full Instructions for Experiment 2

Before beginning the task participants read the following instructions:

Welcome! It is the year 2031 and NASA has finally set foot on Mars.
While Mars has less oxygen in its atmosphere than Earth, NASA scientists
have discovered that there is indeed some oxygen. They are developing
systems to optimally extract it so that our astronauts can survive
while plant life develops to sustain humans.

NASA has recruited you to test two new oxygen extraction systems to
determine which system works best in the Martian atomosphere!

You will repeatedly extract oxygen using one of the two systems. A narrow
tank on the right will indicate how much oxygen the system extracted during
the current test. This oxygen will be transferred to a larger tank. NASA
needs you to fill up the large tank to a minimum level so that it can ensure
the survival of the astronauts on the planet for a sustained period of time.

You goal is to extract oxygen using the system that leads to the most oxygen
collected over the long term. Press the 'Z' button to use the red system,
and the '?/' button to use the blue system. A line near the top of the large
tank will indicate the minimum amount you need to extract.

Do your best! The success of NASA's space mission is in your hands!

Press any key to begin

Aging and Decision-Making 16

Neuropsychological Testing Data for Older Adults

Methods
Older adults were given a series of standardized neuropsychological tests. The
battery of tests was designed to assess general intellectual ability across three functional
realms: attention (WAIS-III Digit Span, Weschler, 1997; WAIS-III Letter-Number
Sequence, Weschler, 1997; WAIS-III Arithmetic, Weschler, 1997; WAIS-III working
memory, Weschler, 1997), executive functioning (Trail Making Test A&B (TMT), Lezak,
1995; Stroop Color-Word Test: Stroop, 1935; FAS; Wisconsin Card Sorting Task
(WCST): Heaton, 1981), and memory (Wechsler Memory Scale Third Edition (WMS-III)
subtests: Weschler, 1997; California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT): Delis, 1987). The
tests were administered in a single two hour session, in the same basic order to all
subjects. The delay period of these tests was kept constant, and was comprised of other
tests not requiring any long term memory storage. The testing order was: CVLT, WAIS-
III Arithmetic subtest, WAIS-III Vocabulary subtest, CVLT delayed recall, WMS-III
Logical Memory subtest, Stroop, TMT A&B, WAIS-III Similarities subtest, WAIS-III
Digit Span subtest, WMS-III Logical Memory delayed-recall, WMS-III Visual
Reproduction subtest, WAIS-III Letter/Numbering Sequencing subtest, WCST
computerized version, WMS-III Visual Reproduction delayed-recall.
The standard, age appropriate, published norms were used to calculate normative
scores for each subject. Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations and ranges of
standardized z-scores on each test for older adult participants in the study. For all of the
WAIS subtests, the percentile was calculated according to testing instructions, and this
score was then converted to a standardized z-score. For the Stroop, CVLT, and WCST
standardized T-scores were calculated according to testing directions, and this score was
then converted to a standardized z-score. Finally, for the TMT and COWA standard z-
scores were calculated according to the testing instructions. Subjects were excluded from
participation if they consistently scored two standard deviations below the standardized
mean on neuropsychological tests in the same functional realm. The neuropsychological
testing session was held well-before the experimental session, and only participants who
were within normal ranges were asked to participate in the experiment.

Relationship Between Neuropsychological Test Scores and Task Performance

While the relationship between each older adult participant’s scores on the
neuropsychological tests and their performance in the decision-making task is beyond the
scope of this paper, we examined correlations between scores from each
neuropsychological test and points earned during each experiment. None of the
neuropsychological measures were associated with performance for Experiment 1. For
Experiment 2, we observed significant correlations between points earned and error
scores on the WCST (errors (r=.29, p<.05), perseverative errors (r=.32, p=.32)). The
errors measure on the WCST accounts for total incorrect answers on the WCST, and the
perseverative errors measure from the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (WCST) indicates
the number of times a participant goes back to an old rule after the rule has changed. The
WCST has been shown to activate the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex to store earlier events
in working memory and the mid-ventrolateral prefrontal cortex to signal the need for a
mental shift in response to a new set (Monchi et al., 2001).
Aging and Decision-Making 17

Thus, while this analysis is exploratory, the results are consistent with the view
that performance on the choice-dependent tasks in Experiment 2 involved frontally
mediated, model-based learning of the choice-dependent nature of the reward structure.

Table 1

Neuropsychological Test Mean (SD) Range

Digit Span 0.93 (1.0) -0.6 - 2.5
Character Sequence 0.99 (1.0) -1.7 - 2.5
WAIS-III Arithmetic 0.94 (0.84) -1.0 - 2.5
Wais WM 1.02 (1.1) -0.9 - 3
Trails A -0.42 (0.57) -1.4 - 0.86
Trails B -0.66 (0.47) -1.23 - 0.83
Stroop Interference 0.51 (0.83) -0.8 - 3
FAS 0.37 (0.81) -0.91 - 2.40
WCST Categories 0.58 (0.90) -2.1 - 2.0
WCST Errors 0.18 (1.4) -2.3 - 2.5
WCST perseveration 0.26 (1.1) -1.9 - 2.5
CVLT Immediate Recall 0.94 (0.89) -1 - 2
CVLT Delayed Recall 0.78 (0.67) -0.5 - 2
WMS-III Immediate Recall 0.84 (0.91) -1 - 2.5
WMS-III Delayed Recall 1.4 (0.58) 0.3 - 2.5
Visual Reproduction Immediate 0.14 (1.0) -1.3 - 1.7
Visual Reproduction Delay 0.84 (1.1) -1.7 - 2.5
Aging and Decision-Making 18

Table 2

Neuropsychological Test Mean (SD) Range

Digit Span 0.77 (0.93) -1.30 - 2.50
Character Sequence 0.69 (0.95) -1.70 - 2.50
WAIS-III Arithmetic 0.97 (0.78) -1.00 - 2.50
Wais WM 0.84 (0.93) -1.30 - 2.90
Trails A -0.63 (0.66) -1.63 - 1.31
Trails B -0.46 (0.64) -1.39 - 1.32
Stroop Interference 0.44 (0.79) -1.40 - 3.00
FAS 0.27 (0.92) -2.56 - 2.64
WCST Categories 0.15 (1.28) -2.72 - 2.03
WCST Errors 0.14 (0.92) -1.90 - 2.50
WCST perseveration 0.26 (0.79) -1.90 - 2.50
CVLT Immediate Recall 0.68 (0.86) -1.00 - 2.50
CVLT Delayed Recall 0.68 (0.82) -1.00 - 2.50
WMS-III Immediate Recall 1.13 (0.85) -1.00 - 2.50
WMS-III Delayed Recall 1.28 (0.96) -1.00 - 2.50
Visual Reproduction Immediate 0.75 (1.17) -1.30 - 2.50
Visual Reproduction Delay 0.92 (1.11) -1.70 - 2.50
Aging and Decision-Making 19

References

Delis, D.C., Kramer, J.H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B.A. (1987). California Verbal Learning
Test: Adult Version Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Heaton, R. K. (1981) A Manual for the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Odessa, Florida:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Lezak, M. D. (1995). Neuropsychological assessment (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Monchi, O., Petrides, M., Petre, V., Worsley, K., & Dagher, A. (2001). Wisconsin Card
Sorting revisited: distinct neural circuits participating in different stages of the
task identified by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal
of Neuroscience, 21(19), 7733.
Reitan, R. M. (1958). Validity of the Trail Making Test as an indicator of organic brain
damage. Perceptual and motor skills.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 18(643-662).
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition. San Antonio:
Harcourt Brace & Company.