Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Age-Related Changes in Decision Making

  • Geropsychiatry & Cognitive Disorders of Late Life (P Newhouse, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

In light of global population trends, the decision-making capacity of older adults is a pressing societal concern. This review focuses on age differences in four key dimensions: valuation, risk taking, temporal discounting, and decision strategies.

Recent Findings

Aging is associated with structural, functional, and neurochemical changes in neural networks implicated in decision making. However, these changes do not lead to universal deficits. Older adults are not always risk-averse, and their ability to postpone gratification tends to exceed that of younger adults. Age-related changes in motivation influence predecisional information search, valuation of decision outcomes, and selection of decision strategies. Furthermore, age differences are most pronounced when decision tasks tap fluid, rather than crystallized, cognitive abilities.

Summary

The effects of aging on decision making are heterogeneous and reflect an interplay of cognitive, motivational, and social factors. Seniors’ decisions in health care and finance present critical translational targets for this research.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Melorose J, Perroy R, Careas S. World population prospects. United Nations. 2015;1.

  2. Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG, et al. The bearable lightness of aging: judgment and decision processes in older adults. In: Stern PC, Carstensen LL, editors. The aging mind: opportunities in cognitive research. Washington: National Academies Press; 2000. p. 144–65.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nielsen L, Mather MA. Emerging perspectives in social neuroscience and neuroeconomics of aging. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011;6:149–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Raz N et al. Regional brain changes in aging healthy adults: general trends, individual differences and modifiers. Cereb Cortex. 2005;15:1676–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Grady C. The cognitive neuroscience of ageing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13:491–05.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Erixon-Lindroth N, Farde L, Wahlin TBR, et al. The role of the striatal dopamine transporter in cognitive aging. Psychiat Res-Neuroim. 2005;138:1–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Glimcher PW. Understanding risk: a guide for the perplexed. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008;8:348–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Samanez-Larkin GR, Knutson B. Decision making in the ageing brain: changes in affective and motivational circuits. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015;16:278–89 A theoretical framework and empirical review of aging and neural processes in decision making.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Delgado MR. Reward-related responses in the human striatum. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1104:70–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dreher JC, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Kohn P, et al. Age-related changes in midbrain dopaminergic regulation of the human reward system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:15106–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Schott BH, Niehaus L, Wittmann BC, et al. Ageing and early-stage parkinson’s disease affect separable neural mechanisms of mesolimbic reward processing. Brain. 2007;130:2412–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vink M, Kleerekooper I, van den Wildenberg WP, et al. Impact of aging on frontostriatal reward processing. Hum Brain Mapp. 2015;36:2305–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lorenz RC, Gleich T, Beck A, et al. Reward anticipation in the adolescent and aging brain. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014;35:5153–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rademacher L, Salama A, Gründer G, et al. Differential patterns of nucleus accumbens activation during anticipation of monetary and social reward in young and older adults. Soc Cogn Affect Neur. 2014;9:825–31 The first study to explore age differences in neural valuation of non-monetary rewards.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Samanez-Larkin GR, Gibbs SE, Khanna K, et al. Anticipation of monetary gain but not loss in healthy older adults. Nat Neur. 2007;10:787–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Spaniol J, Bowen HJ, Wegier P, et al. Neural responses to monetary incentives in younger and older adults. Brain Res. 2014;1612:70–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cox KM, Aizenstein HJ, Fiez JA. Striatal outcome processing in healthy aging. Cogn Affect Behav Ne. 2008;8:304–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wu CC, Samanez-Larkin GR, Katovich K, et al. Affective traits link to reliable neural markers of incentive anticipation. NeuroImage. 2014;84:279–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown SB, Ridderinkhof KR. Aging and the neuroeconomics of decision making: a review. Cogn Affect Behav Ne. 2009;9:365–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Harbaugh WT, Mayr U, Burghart DR. Neural responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for charitable donations. Science. 2007;316:1622–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Freund AM, Blanchard-Fields F. Age-related differences in altruism across adulthood: making personal financial gain versus contributing to the public good. Dev Psychol. 2014;50:1125–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hubbard J, Harbaugh WT, Srivastava, S, Degras D, Mayr U. J Exp Psychol: Gen. 2016. The first study to examine the neural basis of altruism in younger and older adults.

  23. Homans GC. Social behavior as exchange. Am J Sociol. 1958;597–06.

  24. Carstensen LL, Isaacowitz DM, Charles ST. Taking time seriously: a theory of socioemotional selectivity. Am Psychol. 1999;54:165–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reed AE, Chan L, Mikels JA. Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychol Aging. 2014;29:1–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mather MA, Carstensen LL. Aging and motivated cognition: the positivity effect in attention and memory. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005;9:496–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mather MA, Canli T, English T, Whitfield S, Wais P, Ochsner K, et al. Amygdala rsponses to emotionally valenced stimuli in older and younger adults. Psychological Sci. 2004;259–63.

  28. Leclerc CM, Kensinger EA. Neural processing of emotional pictures and words: a comparison of young and older adults. Dev Neuropsychol. 2011;36:519–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Spaniol J, Wegier P. Decisions from experience: adaptive information search and choice in younger and older adults. Front Neurosci. 2012;6:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. García-garcía I, Kube J, Gaebler M, Horstmann A, Villringer A. Neural processing of negative emotional stimuli and the influence of age, sex and task-related characteristics. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;68:773–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kalenzaga S, Lamidey V, Ergis AM, Clarys D, Piolino P. The positivity bias in aging: motivation or degredation? Emot. 2016;16:602–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mather MA. A review of decision-making processes: weighing the risks and benefits of aging. In: Carstensen LL, Hartel CR, editors. When I’m 64. Washington: National Academies Press; 2006. p. 145–73.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mata R, Josef AK, Samanez-Larkin GR, et al. Age differences in risky choice: a meta-analysis. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011;1235:18–29.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Hertwig R, Barron G, Weber EU, et al. Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Sci. 2004;15:534–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mather MA, Mazar N, Gorlick MA, et al. Risk preferences and aging: the “certainty effect” in older adults’ decision making. Psychol Aging. 2012;27:801–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Frey R, Mata R, Hertwig R. The role of cognitive abilities in decisions from experience: age differences emerge as a function of choice set size. Cognition. 2015;142:60–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hosseini SH, Rostami M, Yomogida Y, et al. Aging and decision making under uncertainty: behavioral and neural evidence for the preservation of decision making in the absence of learning in old age. NeuroImage. 2010;52:1514–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Samanez-Larkin GR, Wagner AD, Knutson B. Expected value information improves financial risk taking across the adult life span. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011;6:207–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lee TMC, Leung AWS, Fox PT, Gao J-H, Chan CCH. Age-related differences in neural activities during risk taking as revealed by functional MRI. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2008;3:7–15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Wu CC, Sacchet MD, Knutson B. Toward an affective neuroscience account of financial risk taking. Front Neurosci. 2012;6:1–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Li SC, Sikström S. Integrative neurocomputational perspectives on cognitive aging neuromodulation and representation. Neurosci Biobehav R. 2002;26:795–08.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Samanez-Larkin GR, Kuhnen CM, Yoo DJ, et al. Variability in nucleus accumbens activity mediates age-related suboptimal financial risk taking. J Neurosci. 2010;30:1426–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Horn JL, Cattell RB. Age differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence. Acta Psychol. 1967;26:107–29.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Laibson D, Gabaix X, Driscoll J, et al. The age of reason: financial decisions over the lifecycle. Am Law Econ Assoc Pap. 2008;1–52.

  45. Henninger DE, Madden DJ, Huettel SA. Processing speed and memory mediate age-related differences in decision making. Psychol Aging. 2010;25:262–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Ebner NC, Freund AM, Baltes PB. Developmental changes in personal goal orientation from young to late adulthood: from striving for gains to maintenance and prevention of losses. Psychol Aging. 2006;21:664–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Harlé KM, Sanfey AG. Social economic decision-making across the lifespan: an fMRI investigation. Neuropsychologia. 2012;50:1416–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Bonem EM, Ellsworth PC, Gonzalez R. Age differences in risk: perceptions intentions and domains. J Behav Decis Making. 2015;28:317–30 An excellent study demonstrating the domain-specificity of age differences in risk perception and risk propensity.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Best R, Charness N. Age differences in the effect of framing on risky choice: a meta-analysis. Psychol Aging. 2015;30:688–98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Josef AK, Richter D, Samanez-Larkin GR, et al. Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2016. doi:10.1037/pspp0000090.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Mata R, Josef AK, Hertwig R. Propensity for risk taking across the life span and around the globe. Psychol Sci. 2016;27:232–43 The first study to examine the relationship between hardship and age-related changes in risk taking.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Frederick S, Loewenstein G, O’Donoghue T. Time discounting and time preference: a critical review. J Econ Lit. 2002;40:351–01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Read D, Read NL. Time discounting over the lifespan. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2004;94:22–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Eppinger B, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD. Reduced sensitivity to immediate reward during decision-making in older than younger adults. PLoS One. 2012;7:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Green L, Fristoe N, Myerson J. Temporal discounting and preference reversals in choice between delayed outcomes. Psychon B Rev. 1994;1:383–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Löckenhoff C, O’Donoghue T, Dunning D. Age differences in temporal discounting: the role of dispositional affect and anticipated emotions. Psychol Aging. 2011;26:274–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Halfmann K, Hedgcock W, Denburg NL. Age-related differences in discounting future gains and losses. J Neurosci Psychol Econ. 2013;6:42–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Hinvest NS, Anderson IM. The effects of real versus hypothetical reward on delay and probability discounting. Q J Exp Psychol. 2010;63:1072–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Bickel WK, Marsch L, Smith CL, et al. Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002;77:129–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Mcclure SM, Laibson DI, Lowenstein G, et al. Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science. 2004;306:503–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Samanez-Larkin GR, Mata R, Radu PT, et al. Age differences in striatal delay sensitivity during intertemporal choice in healthy adults. Front Neurosci. 2011;5:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Buckholtz JW, Treadway MT, Cowan RL, et al. Dopaminergic network differences in human impulsivity. Science. 2010;329:532.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Scheibe S, Mata R, Carstensen LL. Age differences in affective forecasting and experienced emotion surrounding the 2008 US presidential election. Cognition Emotion. 2011;25:1029–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Li N, Ma N, Liu Y, et al. Resting-state functional connectivity predicts impulsivity in economic decision-making. J Neurosci. 2013;33:4886–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Han SD, Boyle PA, Yu L, et al. Ventromedial PFC parahippocampal and cerebellar connectivity are associated with temporal discounting in old age. Exp Gerontol. 2013;48:1489–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Drobetz R, Hänggi J, Maercker A, et al. Structural brain correlates of delay of gratification in the elderly. Behav Neurosci. 2014;128:134–45 An important study that highlights the role of interindividual variation in brain structure postponing gratification in older adults.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Kim BK, Zauberman G. Perception of anticipatory time in temporal discounting. J Neurosci Psychol and Econ. 2009;2:91–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Lempert KM, Phelps EA. The malleability of intertemporal choice. Trends in Cogn Sci. 2016;20:64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Kassam KS, Gilbert DT, Boston A, et al. Future anhedonia and time discounting. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2008;44:1533–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Rutt JL, Löckenhoff CE. Age patterns in mental representations of time: underlying constructs and relevant covariates. Exp Aging Res. 2016;42:289–06.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Wittmann M, Lehnhoff S. Age effects in perception of time. Psychol Rep. 2005;97:921–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Fields SA, Lange K, Ramos A, et al. The relationship between stress and delay discounting: a meta-analytic review. Behav Pharmacol. 2014;25:434–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Haushofer J, Cornelisse S, Seinstra M, et al. No effects of psychosocial stress on intertemporal choice. PLoS One. 2013;8:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Albrecht K, Volz KG, Sutter M, et al. What is for me is not for you: brain correlates of intertemporal choice for self and other. Soc Cog Affect Neur. 2011;6:218–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Charlton SR, Yi R, Porter C, et al. Now for me later for us? Effects of group context on temporal discounting. J Behav Decis Making. 2013;26:118–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Ziegler FV, Tunney RJ. Decisions for others become less impulsive the further away they are on the family tree. PLoS One. 2012;7:1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Czerlinski J, Gigerenzer G, Goldstein DG. How good are simple heuristics? In Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, ABC Research Group. Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1999; pp. 97–118.

  78. Lemaire P. Cognitive strategy variations during aging. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2010;19:363–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Lemaire P. Cognitive aging: the role of strategies. New York: Routledge; 2016. p. 70–118 A comprehensive review of age-related strategy changes in decision making and other cognitive domains.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Mata R, Nunes L. When less is enough: cognitive aging, information search, and decision quality in consumer choice. Psychol Aging. 2010;25:289–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Worthy DA, Otto AR, Doll BB, et al. Older adults are highly responsive to recent events during decision-making. Decision. 2015;2:27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Worthy DA, Maddox WT. Age-based differences in strategy use in choice tasks. Front Neurosci. 2012;5:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Mata R. Understanding the aging decision maker. Hum Dev. 2007;50:359–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Mata R, Josef AK, Lemaire P. Adaptive decision making and aging. In: Hess TM, Strough J, Löckenhoff CE, editors. Aging and decision making: empirical and applied perspectives. London: Academic Press; 2015. p. 105–26.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  85. Park DC, Reuter-Lorenz P. The adaptive brain: aging and neurocognitive scaffolding. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:173–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Kovalchik S, Camerer CF, Grether DM, et al. Aging and decision making: a comparison between neurologically healthy elderly and young individuals. J Econ Behav Organ. 2005;58:79–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Kim S, Hasher L. The attraction effect in decision making: superior performance by older adults. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2005;58:120–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Li Y, Baldassi M, Johnson EJ, et al. Complementary cognitive capabilities, economic decision making, and aging. Psychol Aging. 2013;28:595–613 A study that sheds light on the role of fluid and crystallized intelligence in accounting for age-related differences in different decision tasks.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Worthy DA, Davis T, Gorlick MA, et al. Neural correlates of state-based decision-making in younger and older adults. NeuroImage. 2016;30:13–23 An excellent examination of age-related neural differences in strategy use.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Iyengar SS, Lepper MR. When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing? J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;79:995–1006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Reed AE, Mikels JA, Simon KI. Older adults prefer less choice than younger adults. Psychol Aging. 2008;23:671–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Reed AE, Mikels JA, Löckenhoff CE. Preferences for choice across adulthood: age trajectories and potential mechanisms. Psychol Aging. 2013;28:625–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Tanius BE, Wood SA, Hanoch Y. Aging and choice: applications to Medicare part D. Judgement Decis Mak. 2009;4:92–101.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Löckenhoff CE, Carstensen LL. Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies: motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychol Aging. 2007;22:134–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Preparation of this article was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (DG no. 358797 to J.S.), by the Canada Research Chair program (J.S.), and by an Early Researcher Award from the Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation (J.S.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada

    Erika P. Sparrow & Julia Spaniol

Authors
  1. Erika P. Sparrow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julia Spaniol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Spaniol.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Erika P. Sparrow and Dr. Julia Spaniol declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Geropsychiatry & Cognitive Disorders of Late Life

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sparrow, E.P., Spaniol, J. Age-Related Changes in Decision Making. Curr Behav Neurosci Rep 3, 285–292 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-016-0091-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40473-016-0091-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation