» Articles » PMID: 30395334

Contextual Valence Modulates the Effect of Choice on Incentive Processing

Overview
Date 2018 Nov 6
PMID 30395334
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that reward-related neural activity is enhanced for choice relative to no-choice opportunities in the gain context. The current event-related potential study examined whether this modulatory effect of choice can be observed in both the gain and the loss contexts across anticipatory and consummatory phases of incentive processing. Thirty-two participants performed a simple choice task during which choices were made either by themselves (a choice condition) or by a computer (a no-choice condition) during a gain context (gain vs nongain) and a loss context (nonloss vs loss). Behaviorally, participants reported a higher level of perceived control in the choice than the no-choice condition as well as in the gain than loss context. During the anticipatory phase, the choice relative to the no-choice condition elicited an increased cue-P3 in the loss context and an enhanced stimulus-preceding negativity in the gain context. During the consummatory phase, the choice condition elicited a larger reward positivity (ΔRewP) than the no-choice condition in the gain relative to the loss context but a comparable feedback P3 across contexts. These findings demonstrate that the crucial role of voluntary choice in reward processing is contingent upon contextual valence.

Citing Articles

Neural dynamics underlying the illusion of control during reward processing.

Zheng Y, Yang C, Jiang H, Gao B Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2024; 19(1).

PMID: 39300953 PMC: 11466228. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsae063.


Acute stress selectively blunts reward anticipation but not consumption: An ERP study.

Yi W, Chen Y, Yan L, Kohn N, Wu J Neurobiol Stress. 2023; 27:100583.

PMID: 38025282 PMC: 10660484. DOI: 10.1016/j.ynstr.2023.100583.


Outcome valence and stimulus frequency affect neural responses to rewards and punishments.

Glazer J, Nusslock R Psychophysiology. 2021; 59(3):e13981.

PMID: 34847254 PMC: 10168119. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13981.


The Interplay Between Affective Processing and Sense of Agency During Action Regulation: A Review.

Kaiser J, Buciuman M, Gigl S, Gentsch A, Schutz-Bosbach S Front Psychol. 2021; 12:716220.

PMID: 34603140 PMC: 8481378. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.716220.


Neural dynamics of monetary and social reward processing in social anhedonia.

Wang Z, Li Q, Nie L, Zheng Y Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2020; 15(9):991-1003.

PMID: 32945882 PMC: 7647377. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsaa128.


References
1.
Daw N, Kakade S, Dayan P . Opponent interactions between serotonin and dopamine. Neural Netw. 2002; 15(4-6):603-16. DOI: 10.1016/s0893-6080(02)00052-7. View

2.
Talmi D, Atkinson R, El-Deredy W . The feedback-related negativity signals salience prediction errors, not reward prediction errors. J Neurosci. 2013; 33(19):8264-9. PMC: 6619637. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5695-12.2013. View

3.
Catania A, Sagvolden T . Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980; 34(1):77-86. PMC: 1332946. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-77. View

4.
Mulligan E, Hajcak G . The electrocortical response to rewarding and aversive feedback: The reward positivity does not reflect salience in simple gambling tasks. Int J Psychophysiol. 2017; 132(Pt B):262-267. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.11.015. View

5.
ODoherty J, Critchley H, Deichmann R, Dolan R . Dissociating valence of outcome from behavioral control in human orbital and ventral prefrontal cortices. J Neurosci. 2003; 23(21):7931-9. PMC: 6740603. View