Question 1

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario II&#10;Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study:&#10;Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293&#10;Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card.&#10;In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses.&#10;Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks.&#10;(Scenario II)Which factor was NOT a dependent variable?&#10;A)GSR&#10;B)deck selection&#10;C)programmed loss amount&#10;D)verbal reports about game strategy

Accepted Answer

Programmed loss amount was not a dependent variable, as it was a manipulated variable in the experiment. The dependent variables were GSR and deck selection, as they were measured and observed as a result of the manipulation of the independent variable (presence of losses in the decks). Verbal reports about game strategy were also a dependent variable, as they were obtained from the participants and measured as a result of the manipulation of the independent variable.

Question 2

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario II&#10;Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study:&#10;Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293&#10;Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card.&#10;In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses.&#10;Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks.&#10;(Scenario II)The results of this experiment suggest that individuals with this particular brain damage exhibit the GREATEST deficits in the ability to:&#10;A)experience emotions related to wins and losses.&#10;B)modify behavior based on future consequences.&#10;C)calculate odds ratios.&#10;D)identify the difference between a risky and safe choice.

Accepted Answer

The study found that patients with brain damage in an area crucial for executive functions had difficulty modifying their behavior based on future consequences. This was shown by their continued preference for decks A and B despite the high likelihood of bankruptcy associated with those decks. The control group, on the other hand, adapted their behavior and avoided these decks. Therefore, the greatest deficit in this group was in the ability to modify behavior based on future consequences.

Question 3

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Which data set in Figure 9.1 provides the MOST support for the contention that language development is critically dependent on experience with the language?&#10;A)data set A&#10;B)data set B&#10;C)data set C&#10;D)data set D

Accepted Answer

data set D

Question 4

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario II&#10;Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study:&#10;Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293&#10;Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card.&#10;In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses.&#10;Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks.&#10;(Scenario II)Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied patients with brain damage in which areas?&#10;A)Wernicke's area in the left temporal lobe&#10;B)the prefrontal cortex&#10;C)the amygdala&#10;D)the hippocampus

Accepted Answer

Bechara and colleagues studied patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making, which is most likely referring to the prefrontal cortex.

Question 5

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Figure 9.1 shows the number of verbs,expressed as a percentage of total English vocabulary,between 6 and 24 months of exposure to the English language in internationally adopted preschoolers from China and monolingual infants.Four fabricated sets of data (labeled A-D)are shown.Which data set provides the MOST support for the contention that cognitive factors play a role in language development?&#10;A)data set A&#10;B)data set B&#10;C)data set C&#10;D)data set D

Accepted Answer

The answer of Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario...

Question 6

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Which statement is an example of interpreting orderly changes in language development as a result of emerging cognitive skills?&#10;A)The universality of grammar rules suggests the presence on an innate language acquisition device.&#10;B)In infants acquiring language,sentences at first are short (e.g. ,two words)because working memory has yet to fully develop.&#10;C)Language acquisition progresses in orderly stages only if critical environmental components,such as continued social interaction,are present.&#10;D)Maturing infants imitate the sounds that they hear,in part due to reinforcement from their parents.

Accepted Answer

The statement "In infants acquiring language, sentences at first are short (e.g. ,two words) because working memory has yet to fully develop" suggests that the development of language is dependent on cognitive development, as the limitations of working memory are a cognitive constraint.

Question 7

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Snedeker and colleagues (2007)refers to their research program as a &#34;natural experiment.&#34; However,for which reason is it NOT an example of a true experimental design?&#10;A)Participants were not sampled randomly from the population.&#10;B)The study is not empirical in nature and lacks measurement reliability.&#10;C)There is no random assignment to groups and no manipulation of an independent variable.&#10;D)It is difficult to ascertain if the results would generalize to other languages.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario...

Question 8

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)In a second study,Snedeker and colleagues (2012)found that older (e.g. ,5 year-old)internationally adopted children acquiring English as a second language began correctly using words pertaining to time (e.g. ,yesterday,tomorrow)earlier in their exposure to English than did monolingual infant controls.This observed difference is BEST interpreted as:&#10;A)support for the contention that linguistic development is a separate process from cognitive development.&#10;B)resulting from a more advanced cognitive development in the older children.&#10;C)a reflection of previously developed linguistic expertise in the older children's first language.&#10;D)resulting from some combination of more advanced cognitive development and previous linguistic development in the older children's first language.

Accepted Answer

The observed difference in the study by Snedeker and colleagues (2012) suggests that the older internationally adopted children's earlier correct use of words pertaining to time when acquiring English as a second language can be attributed to both their more advanced cognitive development (due to their age) and their previously developed linguistic expertise in their first language. This combination likely gave them an advantage over the monolingual infant controls.

Question 9

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Snedeker and colleagues (2007)studied the acquisition of English as a second language in preschool children adopted from China.In trying to disentangle the role of linguistic and cognitive development on language acquisition,which factor would serve as the MOST appropriate control group?&#10;A)the acquisition of English by Chinese teens who previously had no exposure to the English language&#10;B)the acquisition of Mandarin by American-born preschoolers adopted into Chinese families&#10;C)the acquisition of Mandarin over the first 2 years of life in Chinese-born infants&#10;D)the acquisition of English as a first language in Chinese infants adopted into American families

Accepted Answer

The control group in a study should be similar in all aspects except for the variable being tested, in this case, the acquisition of the English language. Therefore, the most appropriate control group would be Chinese infants who were adopted into American families and acquired English as their first language, since they are similar to the preschoolers in the study except for the variable being tested. Option A is not appropriate because it involves a different age group and context, Option B involves American-born children who are not being exposed to a second language and Option C involves infants who are acquiring their first language and not a second language.

Question 10

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario II&#10;Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study:&#10;Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293&#10;Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card.&#10;In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses.&#10;Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks.&#10;(Scenario II)The results of this experiment illustrate the role of emotional experience on decision making.Choice situations involving probabilistic outcomes often elicit feelings of anxiety,operationally defined in this study as:&#10;A)the anticipatory GSR.&#10;B)the post-outcome GSR.&#10;C)deck preference.&#10;D)the programmed rate of wins and losses among decks.

Accepted Answer

The anticipatory GSR, as mentioned in the scenario, was used to measure feelings of anxiety or emotional experience in the decision making process.

Question 11

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario I&#10;Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies:&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004&#10;Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x&#10;Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States.&#10;Figure 9.1  &#10;(Scenario I)Which reason BEST explains why the research question posed in Scenario I could not be answered by studying infants' acquisition of the English language and comparing it with infants' acquisition of the Spanish language in American-born bilingual homes?&#10;A)Language and cognitive development remain confounded in these groups.&#10;B)The two groups differ on many potential third variables that could affect rates of language acquisition.&#10;C)English and Spanish are too similar linguistically for meaningful differences in language acquisition to occur.&#10;D)The linguistic expertise of the parents in the two groups may differ.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario...

Question 12

Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario II&#10;Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study:&#10;Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293&#10;Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card.&#10;In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses.&#10;Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as &#34;the bad decks.&#34; Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks.&#10;(Scenario II)What can be accurately inferred from Scenario II?&#10;A)The patients with brain damage lacked the ability to respond emotionally to wins and losses.&#10;B)All other things being equal,the patients with brain damage had a much stronger behavioral preference for the larger reward than the control participants.&#10;C)The patients with brain damage had a much stronger emotional response to wins than to losses.&#10;D)The likelihood of losses leading up to a choice elicited a blunted emotional response in the patients with brain damage.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Use the following to answer questions &#10;Scenario...

Deck 9: Scenarios