The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) is used to assess decision-making in clinical populations. The original IGT does not disambiguate reward and punishment learning; however, an adaptation of the task, the "play-or-pass" IGT, was developed to better distinguish between reward and punishment learning. We evaluated the test-retest reliability of measures of reward and punishment learning from the play-or-pass IGT and examined associations with self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Participants completed the task across two sessions, and we calculated mean-level differences and rank-order stability of behavioral measures across the two sessions using traditional scoring, involving session-wide choice proportions, and computational modeling, involving estimates of different aspects of trial-level learning. Measures using both approaches were reliable; however, computational modeling provided more insights regarding between-session changes in performance, and how performance related to self-reported measures of reward/punishment sensitivity and internalizing symptoms. Our results show promise in using the play-or-pass IGT to assess decision-making; however, further work is still necessary to validate the play-or-pass IGT.