Final answer:
Individuals with orbitofrontal damage would favour the stack of cards with smaller payoffs and smaller penalties due to impaired consequence evaluation, while the control group would prefer the stack with larger payoffs despite the huge penalties.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question posed concerns the decision-making process in individuals with orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) damage compared to those without such damage (controls) when faced with two types of risks: one stack of cards with larger payoffs but huge penalties and the second stack with smaller payoffs and smaller penalties. Studies on the orbitofrontal cortex, which is implicated in decision-making and risk evaluation, suggest that people with damage to this area tend to make riskier choices because their ability to evaluate future consequences is impaired. Therefore, the correct answer is: b) Orbitofrontal damage patients would favour deck 2, the one with smaller payoffs and smaller penalties, because they may be less sensitive to future consequences and thus less deterred by the large penalties of deck 1. In contrast, controls, who can evaluate the risks more accurately, would favour deck 1 with the larger payoffs, as they are more likely to understand and weigh the risks of the huge penalties involved.