We often read or hear stories about older adults being conned out of their life
savings, but are older individuals really more susceptible to fraud than younger
adults? And, if so, how exactly does aging affect judgment and decision-making abilities?
Recent work led by University of Iowa neuroscientist Natalie Denburg, Ph.D., suggests
that for a significant number of older adults, measurable neuropsychological deficits
do seem to lead to poor decision-making and an increased vulnerability to fraud.
The findings also suggest that these individuals may experience disproportionate
aging of a brain region critical for decision-making.
"Our research suggests that elders who fall prey to fraudulent advertising are not
simply gullible, depressed, lonely or less intelligent. Rather, it is truly more
of a medical or neurological problem," said Denburg, who is an assistant professor
of neurology in the UI Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine. "Our work
sheds new light on this problem and perhaps may lead to a way to identify people
at risk of being deceived."
Being able to identify how aging affects judgment and decision-making abilities
could have broad societal implications. How to combat deceptive advertising targeted
at older individuals -- some of whom appear to be particularly vulnerable to fraud
-- is one important area of concern. In addition, older age is a time when individuals
often are faced with many critical life decisions, including health care and housing
choices, investment of retirement income, and allocation of personal wealth.
"By simply identifying a person as potentially vulnerable to fraud, family members
can be more vigilant and can implement measures to protect the older adult," Denburg
said. "In addition, a conservator or family member could be involved in transactions
involving large amounts of money."
Denburg's most recent study, published December 2007 in the Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, shows that 35 to 40 percent of a test group of 80 healthy older
adults with no apparent neurological deficits have poor decision-making abilities
as tested in a laboratory experiment known as the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). The
IGT is a computerized decision-making test where participants draw cards from different
decks with the aim of maximizing their winnings. Some of the decks yield good results
in aggregate, while others yield poor outcomes.
Following the poor decision-makers through several additional tests, the researchers
found that in addition to the poor performance on the IGT, this subgroup of older
adults also were more likely to fall prey to deceptive advertising.
Using a set of real advertisements that had been deemed misleading by the Federal
Trade Commission and several counterpart, non-deceptive advertisements, the study
showed that the poor decision-makers are much less able to spot inconsistencies
and pick up on deceptive messages than good decision-makers. Poor decision-makers
also were more likely to indicate an intention to buy the article advertised in
the misleading advertisement. In contrast, there was no difference in comprehension
of non-deceptive advertisements between the two groups of older adults.
The researchers also measured the amount of palm sweating for each participant as
they performed the Iowa Gambling Task. Bodily (or autonomic) responses, like sweating,
have been shown to play an important role in decision-making. When these responses
are absent or abnormal, then decision-making also is affected.
Good decision-makers display different anticipatory responses (amount of sweating)
prior to a good or a bad choice, which appears to help them discriminate between
the two options. In contrast, the older adults with poor decision-making abilities
did not sweat more or less when deciding between a good or bad choice.
Another group of patients who perform poorly on the IGT and have abnormal bodily
responses to the test are individuals with acquired damage to the ventromedial prefrontal
cortex (VMPC) -- an area of the brain that appears to be critical for good decision-making.
"Our hypothesis is that older poor decision-makers have deficits in their prefrontal
cortex," Denburg explained. "The next element of our study will be to complete structural
and functional brain-imaging studies to see if we can identify differences between
poor decision-makers and good decision-makers either in brain structure or in how
the brain functions during decision-making tasks."
The team is conducting structural imaging tests, and Denburg has just received a
three-year, $100,00 grant from the Dana Foundation to do functional imaging studies.
Preliminary analysis of the structural imaging data suggests there are physical
differences between the brains of poor decision-makers and those of the good decision-makers.
Understanding the neurological basis for impaired decision-making could also suggest
potential medications that might help. Some studies have suggested that altering
neurotransmitter levels may affect decision-making ability. However, Denburg notes
that this approach is speculative at this time.
The current study was funded by a grant from the National Institute on Aging. In
addition to Denburg, the research team included Michael Hernandez, a UI neurosciences
graduate student, and Torricia Yamada, a UI counseling psychology graduate student;
Daniel Tranel, Ph.D., UI professor of neurology and psychology; Antoine Bechara,
Ph.D., associate professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Southern
California and UI adjunct associate professor of neurology; Catherine Cole, Ph.D.,
professor and head of marketing in the UI Henry B. Tippie College of Business; and
Robert Wallace, M.D., professor of epidemiology in the UI College of Public Health.
STORY SOURCE: Natalie Denburg, Neurology,
natalie-denburg@uiowa.edu; University of Iowa Health Science Relations,
5135 Westlawn, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1178
CONTACT: Jennifer Brown, 319-335-9917 jennifer-l-brown@uiowa.edu