Skip to main content
Log in

Gender differences in reward sensitivity and information processing during decision-making

  • Published:
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gender differences in reward sensitivity and information processing were examined in two studies using a dynamic decision-making task. In Experiment 1, the optimal strategy involved forgoing an option that provided larger immediate rewards in favor of one yielding larger delayed rewards. In Experiment 2, the optimal strategy was to select the option that provided larger immediate rewards because the delayed reward option never gave larger rewards than the immediate reward option. Foregone reward information was either presented or withheld. In Experiment 1, information regarding foregone rewards biased participants toward the sub-optimal choice, whereas in Experiment 2, foregone rewards directed participants toward the optimal option. Males selected the optimal choice more in the delayed rewards task, while females were more biased toward the poorer choice by foregone reward information. In contrast, females outperformed males in the immediate rewards task. The results suggest a gender difference in information processing styles during decision-making.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andreano, J. M., & Cahill, L. (2009). Sex influences on the neurobiology of learning and memory. Learning & Memory, 16(4), 248–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bajtelsmit, V. L., & Bernasek, A. (1996). Why do women invest differently than men? Financial Counseling and Planning, 7, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: gender, overconfidence, and common stock investments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 261–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolla, K. I., Eldreth, D. A., Matochik, J. A., & Cadet, J. L. (2004). Sex-related differences in a gambling task and its neurological correlates. Cerebral Cortex, 14(11), 1226–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinig, M. F. (1995). Does mediation systematically disadvantage women? William and Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 2, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, K. A., & Worthy, D. A. (2013). Do narcissists make better decisions? An investigation of narcissism and dynamic decision-making performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 112–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill, L. (2006). Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience Reviews, 7, 477–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47, 448–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cubitt, R. P., & Sugden, R. (2001). Dynamic decision-making under uncertainty: an experimental investigation of choices between accumulator gambles. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 22, 103–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deakin, J., Aitken, M., Robbins, T., & Sahakian, B. J. (2004). Risk taking during decision-making in normal volunteers changes with age. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10, 590–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, P. D., Gilkeson, J. H., & List, J. A. (2002). Gender differences in revealed risk taking: evidence from mutual fund investors. Economics Letters, 76(2), 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2008). Forecasting risk attitudes: an experimental study using actual and forecast gamble choices. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaechter, S., Johnson, E. J., & Hermann, A. (2007). Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices. CeDEx Discussion Paper 2007-02. University of Nottingham.

  • Gureckis, T. M., & Love, B. C. (2009). Learning in noise: dynamic decision-making in a variable environment. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 180–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jianakoplos, N. A., & Bernasek, A. (1998). Are women more risk averse? Economic Inquiry, 36, 620–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, K. N., & Marakovic, N. N. (1996). Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: rates decrease as amounts increase. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(1), 100–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, I. P., Snyder, M. A., & Chapman, D. P. (1988). The interaction of experiential and situational factors and gender in a simulated risky decision-making task. Journal of Psychology, 122, 173–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logue, A. W., & Anderson, Y. D. (2001). Higher education administrators: when the future does not make a difference. Psychological Science, 12, 276–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers-Levy, J. (1989). Gender differences in information processing: a selectivity interpretation. In P. Cafferata & A. Tybout (Eds.), Cognitive and affective responses to advertising (pp. 219–260). MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, M., & Ansic, D. (1997). Gender differences in risk behaviour in financial decision-making: an experimental analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18(6), 605–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reavis, R., & Overman, W. H. (2001). Adult sex differences on a decision-making task previously shown to depend on the orbital prefrontal cortex. Behavioral Neuroscience, 115(1), 196–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, B., Ortengren, A., Richards, J. B., & De Wit, H. (2006). Dimensions of impulsive behavior: personality and behavioral measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 305–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoemaker, P. H. (1998). Determinants of risk-taking: behavior and economic views. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 6, 49–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, I. W. (2003). Gender differences in delay of gratification: a meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 49, 451–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1983). Preference reversals: a broader perspective. American Economic Review, 73, 590–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, R., de Visser, L., Van de Loo, A. J. A. E., Mets, M. A. J., Van Willigenburg, G. M., & Homberg, J. R. (2012). Sex differences in decision-making in adult normal volunteers are related to differences in the interaction of emotion and cognitive control. In K. O. Moore & N. P. Gonzalez (Eds.), Handbook on psychology of decision-making: new research (pp. 179–198). Hauppage: Nova Science Publisher Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Bos, R., Homberg, J., & de Visser, L. (2013). A critical review of sex differences in decision-making tasks: focus on the Iowa gambling task. Behavioural Brain Research, 238(1), 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehrung, D. A., Kam-Hon, L., Tse, D. K., & Vertinsky, I. B. (1989). Adjusting risky situations: a theoretical framework and empirical test. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2, 189–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weller, J. A., Levin, I. P., & Bechara, A. (2010). Do individual differences in Iowa gambling task performance predict adaptive decision making for risky gains and losses? Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(2), 141–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. L., & Meck, W. H. (1991). The organizational effects of gonadal steroids on sexually dimorphic spatial ability. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 16, 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, A., & Carducci, B. J. (1991). Sensation seeking and financial risk taking in everyday money matters. Journal of Business and Psychology, 5(4), 525–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthy, D. A., Gorlick, M. A., Pacheco, J. L., Schnyer, D. M., & Maddox, W. T. (2011). With age comes wisdom: decision-making in younger and older adults. Psychological Science, 22, 1375–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthy, D. A., Otto, A. R., & Maddox, W. T. (2012). Working-memory load and temporal myopia in dynamic decision-making. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(6), 1640–1658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Darrell A. Worthy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Byrne, K.A., Worthy, D.A. Gender differences in reward sensitivity and information processing during decision-making. J Risk Uncertain 50, 55–71 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-015-9206-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-015-9206-7

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Navigation