Article

Neural processing of reward magnitude under varying attentional demands.

Department of Neurology and Centre for Advanced Imaging, Otto-von-Guericke-University, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany.
Brain research (Impact Factor: 2.46). 02/2011; 1383:218-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.01.095
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Central to the organization of behavior is the ability to represent the magnitude of a prospective reward and the costs related to obtaining it. Therein, reward-related neural activations are discounted in dependence of the effort required to resolve a given task. Varying attentional demands of the task might however affect reward-related neural activations. Here we employed fMRI to investigate the neural representation of expected values during a monetary incentive delay task with varying attentional demands. Following a cue, indicating at the same time the difficulty (hard/easy) and the reward magnitude (high/low) of the upcoming trial, subjects performed an attention task and subsequently received feedback about their monetary reward. Consistent with previous results, activity in anterior-cingulate, insular/orbitofrontal and mesolimbic regions co-varied with the anticipated reward-magnitude, but also with the attentional requirements of the task. These activations occurred contingent on action-execution and resembled the response time pattern of the subjects. In contrast, cue-related activations, signaling the forthcoming task-requirements, were only observed within attentional control structures. These results suggest that anticipated reward-magnitude and task-related attentional demands are concurrently processed in partially overlapping neural networks of anterior-cingulate, insular/orbitofrontal, and mesolimbic regions.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
86 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recently, attempts have been made to disentangle the neural underpinnings of preparatory processes related to reward and attention. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research showed that neural activity related to the anticipation of reward and to attentional demands invokes neural activity patterns featuring large-scale overlap, along with some differences and interactions. Due to the limited temporal resolution of fMRI, however, the temporal dynamics of these processes remain unclear. Here, we report an event-related potentials (ERP) study in which cued attentional demands and reward prospect were combined in a factorial design. Results showed that reward prediction dominated early cue processing, as well as the early and later parts of the contingent negative variation (CNV) slow-wave ERP component that has been associated with task-preparation processes. Moreover these reward-related electrophysiological effects correlated across participants with response-time speeding on reward-prospect trials. In contrast, cued attentional demands affected only the later part of the CNV, with the highest amplitudes following cues predicting high-difficulty potential-reward targets, thus suggesting maximal task preparation when the task requires it and entails reward prospect. Consequently, we suggest that task-preparation processes triggered by reward can arise earlier, and potentially more directly, than strategic top-down aspects of preparation based on attentional demands.
    NeuroImage 09/2013; · 6.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective The primary purpose of this study was to examine neurobiological underpinnings of reward processing that may relate to treatment outcome for binge-eating disorder (BED).Method Prior to starting treatment, 19 obese persons seeking treatment for BED performed a monetary incentive delay task during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Analyses examined how the neural correlates of reward processing related to binge-eating status after 4-months of treatment.ResultsTen individuals continued to report binge-eating (BEpost-tx) following treatment and 9 individuals did not (NBEpost-tx). The groups did not differ in body mass index. The BEpost-tx group relative to the NBEpost-tx group showed diminished recruitment of the ventral striatum and the inferior frontal gyrus during the anticipatory phase of reward processing and reduced activity in the medial prefrontal cortex during the outcome phase of reward processing.DiscussionThese results link brain reward circuitry to treatment outcome in BED and suggest that specific brain regions underlying reward processing may represent important therapeutic targets in BED. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2014; 47:376–384)
    International Journal of Eating Disorders 05/2014; 47(4). · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anticipating a potential benefit and how difficult it will be to obtain it are valuable skills in a constantly changing environment. In the human brain, the anticipation of reward is encoded by the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC) and Striatum. Naturally, potential rewards have an incentive quality, resulting in a motivational effect improving performance. Recently it has been proposed that an upcoming task requiring effort induces a similar anticipation mechanism as reward, relying on the same cortico-limbic network. However, this overlapping anticipatory activity for reward and effort has only been investigated in a perceptual task. Whether this generalizes to high-level cognitive tasks remains to be investigated. To this end, an fMRI experiment was designed to investigate anticipation of reward and effort in cognitive tasks. A mental arithmetic task was implemented, manipulating effort (difficulty), reward, and delay in reward delivery to control for temporal confounds. The goal was to test for the motivational effect induced by the expectation of bigger reward and higher effort. The results showed that the activation elicited by an upcoming difficult task overlapped with higher reward prospect in the ACC and in the striatum, thus highlighting a pivotal role of this circuit in sustaining motivated behavior.
    PLoS ONE 01/2014; 9(3):e91008. · 3.73 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
35 Downloads
Available from
Jul 25, 2014