% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Ambrase:1030926,
author = {Ambrase, Aiste and Müller, Veronika I. and Camilleri,
Julia and Wong, Hong Yu and Derntl, Birgit},
title = {{D}istinct neural networks of task engagement and choice
response in moral, risky, and ambiguous decision-making:
{A}n {ALE} meta-analysis},
journal = {Imaging neuroscience},
volume = {2},
issn = {2837-6056},
address = {Cambridge, MA},
publisher = {MIT Press},
reportid = {FZJ-2024-05519},
pages = {1 - 35},
year = {2024},
note = {This research did not receive any specific grant from
funding agencies in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors. B.D. and A.A. are supported by the
DFG (DE2319, IRTG 2804). V.I.M. and J.A.C. are supported by
the National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH074457) and
the Helmholtz Portfolio Theme “Supercomputing and
Modelling for the Human Brain.”},
abstract = {Moral, risky, and ambiguous decision-making are likely to
be characterized by common and distinct cognitive processes
and thus show partly overlapping neural correlates.
Previously, two different analysis approaches have been used
to assess the neural correlates in all three domains: (a)
comparing general engagement in an experimental task versus
a control task (task engagement) or (b) comparing actual
opposite choices made during the experimental task (choice
response). Several coordinate-based activation likelihood
estimation meta-analyses were performed to delineate
consistent activations across experiments of the two
analysis categories and the different decision-making
domains. Our results show that task engagement and choice
response capture different aspects of salience network
involvement and reward-related striatum processing during
decision-making. When assessing domains separately, we
discovered that moral cues are processed in a multi-modal
social cognition network, while risk and ambiguity require
engagement of the salience and the frontoparietal attention
networks. This is the first meta-analysis to disentangle the
two analysis approaches yielding new insight into common and
distinct neural correlates of different kinds of
decision-making.},
cin = {INM-7},
ddc = {050},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406},
pnm = {5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability
(POF4-525) / 5253 - Neuroimaging (POF4-525)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5253},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {40800307},
UT = {WOS:001529784400016},
doi = {10.1162/imag_a_00277},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1030926},
}