Dataset Information

Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: interactions between affect and effect.

ABSTRACT: Decision-making invokes two fundamental axes of control: affect or valence, spanning reward and punishment, and effect or action, spanning invigoration and inhibition. We studied the acquisition of instrumental responding in healthy human volunteers in a task in which we orthogonalized action requirements and outcome valence. Subjects were much more successful in learning active choices in rewarded conditions, and passive choices in punished conditions. Using computational reinforcement-learning models, we teased apart contributions from putatively instrumental and Pavlovian components in the generation of the observed asymmetry during learning. Moreover, using model-based fMRI, we showed that BOLD signals in striatum and substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (SN/VTA) correlated with instrumentally learnt action values, but with opposite signs for go and no-go choices. Finally, we showed that successful instrumental learning depends on engagement of bilateral inferior frontal gyrus. Our behavioral and computational data showed that instrumental learning is contingent on overcoming inherent and plastic Pavlovian biases, while our neuronal data showed this learning is linked to unique patterns of brain activity in regions implicated in action and inhibition respectively.

SUBMITTER: Guitart-Masip M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3387384 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: interactions between affect and effect.

Guitart-Masip Marc M Huys Quentin J M QJ Fuentemilla Lluis L Dayan Peter P Duzel Emrah E Dolan Raymond J RJ

NeuroImage 20120421 1

Decision-making invokes two fundamental axes of control: affect or valence, spanning reward and punishment, and effect or action, spanning invigoration and inhibition. We studied the acquisition of instrumental responding in healthy human volunteers in a task in which we orthogonalized action requirements and outcome valence. Subjects were much more successful in learning active choices in rewarded conditions, and passive choices in punished conditions. Using computational reinforcement-learning ...[more]

PMID: 22548809

Similar Datasets

Project description:In the DSM-5, psychiatric diagnoses are made based on self-reported symptoms and clinician-identified signs. Though helpful in choosing potential interventions based on the available regimens, this conceptualization of psychiatric diseases can limit basic science investigation into their underlying causes. The reward prediction error (RPE) hypothesis of dopamine neuron function posits that phasic dopamine signals encode the difference between the rewards a person expects and experiences. The computational framework from which this hypothesis was derived, temporal difference reinforcement learning (TDRL), is largely focused on reward processing rather than punishment learning. Many psychiatric disorders are characterized by aberrant behaviors, expectations, reward processing, and hypothesized dopaminergic signaling, but also characterized by suffering and the inability to change one's behavior despite negative consequences. In this review, we provide an overview of the RPE theory of phasic dopamine neuron activity and review the gains that have been made through the use of computational reinforcement learning theory as a framework for understanding changes in reward processing. The relative dearth of explicit accounts of punishment learning in computational reinforcement learning theory and its application in neuroscience is highlighted as a significant gap in current computational psychiatric research. Four disorders comprise the main focus of this review: two disorders of traditionally hypothesized hyperdopaminergic function, addiction and schizophrenia, followed by two disorders of traditionally hypothesized hypodopaminergic function, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Insights gained from a reward processing based reinforcement learning framework about underlying dopaminergic mechanisms and the role of punishment learning (when available) are explored in each disorder. Concluding remarks focus on the future directions required to characterize neuropsychiatric disorders with a hypothesized cause of underlying dopaminergic transmission.

Dataset Information

Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: interactions between affect and effect.

Publications

Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: interactions between affect and effect.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets