Rogers RD, Ramnani N, Mackay C, Wilson JL, Jezzard P, Carter CS et al. Distinct portions of anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex are activated by reward processing in separable phases of decision-making cognition. Biol Psychiatry 55: 594-602
Choosing between actions associated with uncertain rewards and punishments is mediated by neural circuitry encompassing the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and striatum; however, the precise conditions under which these different components are activated during decision-making cognition remain uncertain.
Fourteen healthy volunteers completed an event-based functional magnetic resonance imaging protocol to investigate blood-oxygenation-level-dependent (BOLD) responses during independently modeled phases of choice cognition. In the "decision phase," participants decided which of two simultaneous visually presented gambles they wished to play for monetary reward. The gambles differed in their magnitude of gains, magnitude of losses, and the probabilities with which these outcomes were delivered. In the "outcome phase," the result of each choice was indicated on the visual display.
In the decision phase, choices involving large gains were associated with increased BOLD responses in the pregenual ACC, paracingulate, and right posterior orbitolateral cortex compared with choices involving small gains. In the outcome phase, good outcomes were associated with increased BOLD responses in the posterior orbitomedial cortex, subcallosal ACC, and ventral striatum compared with negative outcomes. There was only limited overlap between reward-related activity in ACC and orbitofrontal cortex during the decision and outcome phases.
Neural activity within the medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex, pregenual ACC, and striatum mediate distinct representations of reward-related information that are deployed at different stages during a decision-making episode.
"FRN, then, may indicate activity in the ventral striatum, caudate, amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex, and orbitalfrontal cortex in response to rewards compared to nonrewards (see also Foti, Weinberg, Dien, & Hajcak, 2011; but see Cohen, Cavanaugh, & Slagter, 2011). Functional MRI data indicating that the medial prefrontal cortex may be more active in response to gain relative to losses (Fujiwara, Tobler, Taira, Iijima, & Tsutsui, 2009; Rogers et al., 2004) and to pleasant versus unpleasant images (Sabatinelli, Bradley, Lang, Costa, & Versace , 2007) appears to support Carlson and colleagues' contention. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Conservatives, compared to liberals, are consistently found to exhibit physiological sensitivity to aversive stimuli. However, it remains unknown whether conservatives are also sensitive to salient positively valenced stimuli. We therefore used event-related potentials to determine the relationship between system justification (SJ), a fundamental component of conservative political ideology, and neural processing of negative and positive feedback. Participants (N = 29) filled out questionnaire assessments of SJ. Feedback-related negativity (FRN), an event-related potential component thought to index activity in neural regions associated with reward processing, was assessed in response to positive and negative feedback on a time estimation task. A significant interaction was noted between SJ and feedback type in predicting FRN. Simple effects tests suggested that SJ predicted greater FRN in response to positive but not to negative feedback. Conservatives may experience salient positive information with a heightened intensity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Journal of Experimental Psychology General 12/2014; 143(3):1004-1010. DOI:10.1037/a0035179 · 5.50 Impact Factor
"Particularly relevant to our study, the dorsal and anterior regions of the mPFC appear to mediate the relationship between personal emotional experience with current environmental context under cognitive demand (Phan et al., 2004) and to encode abstract reinforcement during reward processing (O'Reilly, 2010). Specifically, during decision making, increased activation of the pregenual anterior cingulate and the dorsal mPFC represents reward magnitude with the goal to maximize reinforcement (Rogers et al., 2004). Further, a recent comprehensive study of lesion-symptom mapping found that value-based decision making was associated with both the ventral medial and dorsal anterior PFC regions (Glascher et al., 2012), which overlap with the mPFC region that this study found to be correlated with accumbens DA release. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Impulsivity, and in particular the negative urgency aspect of this trait, is associated with poor inhibitory control when experiencing negative emotion. Individual differences in aspects of impulsivity have been correlated with striatal dopamine D2/D3 receptor availability and function. This multi-modal pilot study used both positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to evaluate dopaminergic and neural activity, respectively, using modified versions of the monetary incentive delay task. Twelve healthy female subjects underwent both scans and completed the NEO Personality Inventory Revised to assess Impulsiveness (IMP). We examined the relationship between nucleus accumbens (NAcc) dopaminergic incentive/reward release, measured as a change in D2/D3 binding potential between neutral and incentive/reward conditions with [11C]raclopride PET, and blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) activation elicited during the anticipation of rewards, measured with fMRI. Left NAcc incentive/reward dopaminergic release correlated with anticipatory reward activation within the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), left angular gyrus, mammillary bodies, and left superior frontal cortex. Activation in the mPFC negatively correlated with IMP and mediated the relationship between IMP and incentive/reward dopaminergic release in left NAcc. The mPFC, with a regulatory role in learning and valuation, may influence dopamine incentive/reward release.
"The significantly higher BOLD signal during the acceptance of overcompensated compared to fair offers (Fig. 4C) showed the involvement of this brain network towards the acceptance of overcompensating offers. The involvement the caudate-cingulate– thalamus network might be either in the selection of action associated with higher value outcomes (Hikosaka et al., 2006; Kim et al., 2009; Rogers et al., 2004; Samejima et al., 2005) or in the processing of rewards (Bush et al., 2002; Delgado et al., 2003, 2004; Hikosaka et al., 2006; Knutson et al., 2001; Martin-Soelch et al., 2003; Williams et al., 2004), and does not support previous thinking that inequity aversion is symmetric in humans (Camerer et al., 2005; Fehr and Camerer, 2007; Fehr and Gachter, 2002; Guth et al., 1982). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Human decision-making in situations of inequity has long been regarded as a competition between the sense of fairness and self-interest, primarily based on behavioral and neuroimaging studies of inequity that disfavor the actor while favoring others. Here, we use functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments to study refusals and protests using both favoring and disfavoring inequity in three economic exchange games with undercompensating, nearly equal, and overcompensating offers. Refusals of undercompensating offers recruited a heightened activity in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). Accepting of overcompensating offers recruited significantly higher node activity in, and network activity among, the caudate, the cingulate cortex, and the thalamus. Protesting of undercompensating fixed offers activated the network consisting of the right dlPFC and the left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and midbrain in the substantia nigra. These findings suggest that perceived fairness and social decisions are the results of coordination between evaluated fairness norms, self-interest and reward.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.