Dataset Information

Single-trial EEG dissociates motivation and conflict processes during decision-making under risk.

ABSTRACT: In making decisions under risk (i.e., choosing whether to gamble when the outcome probabilities are known), two aspects of decision are of particular concern. The first, if gambling, is how large are potential gains compared to losses? The subjectively larger, the more rewarding to gamble. Thus, this aspect of decision-making, quantified through expected utility (EU), is motivation-related. The second concern is how easy is it to reach the decision? When subjective desirability between gambling and not-gambling is clearly different from each other (regardless of the direction), it is easier to decide. This aspect, quantified through utility distance (UD), is conflict-related. It is unclear how the brain simultaneously processes these two aspects of decision-making. Forty-five participants decided whether to gamble during electroencephalogram (EEG) recording. To compute trial-by-trial variability in EU and UD, we fit participants' choices to models inspired by Expected-Utility and Prospect theories using hierarchical-Bayesian modeling. To examine unique influences of EU and UD, we conducted model-based single-trial EEG analyses with EU and UD as simultaneous regressors. While both EU and UD were positively associated with P3-like activity and delta-band power, the contribution of EU was around 200?ms earlier. Thus, during decision-making under risk, people may allocate their attention to motivation-related aspects before conflict-related aspects. Next, following learning the options and before reporting their decision, higher EU was associated with stronger alpha and beta suppression, while higher UD was associated with a stronger contingent-negativity-variation-like activity. This suggests distinct roles of EU and UD on anticipation-related processes. Overall, we identified time and frequency characteristics of EEG signals that differentially traced motivation-related and conflict-related information during decision-making under risk.

SUBMITTER: Pornpattananangkul N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6401252 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Single-trial EEG dissociates motivation and conflict processes during decision-making under risk.

Pornpattananangkul Narun N Grogans Shannon S Yu Rongjun R Nusslock Robin R

NeuroImage 20181214

In making decisions under risk (i.e., choosing whether to gamble when the outcome probabilities are known), two aspects of decision are of particular concern. The first, if gambling, is how large are potential gains compared to losses? The subjectively larger, the more rewarding to gamble. Thus, this aspect of decision-making, quantified through expected utility (EU), is motivation-related. The second concern is how easy is it to reach the decision? When subjective desirability between gambling ...[more]

PMID: 30557662

Similar Datasets

Project description:Animal approach-avoidance conflict paradigms have been used extensively to operationalize anxiety, quantify the effects of anxiolytic agents, and probe the neural basis of fear and anxiety. Results from human neuroimaging studies support that a frontal-striatal-amygdala neural circuitry is important for approach-avoidance learning. However, the neural basis of decision-making is much less clear in this context. Thus, we combined a recently developed human approach-avoidance paradigm with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to identify neural substrates underlying approach-avoidance conflict decision-making. Fifteen healthy adults completed the approach-avoidance conflict (AAC) paradigm during fMRI. Analyses of variance were used to compare conflict to nonconflict (avoid-threat and approach-reward) conditions and to compare level of reward points offered during the decision phase. Trial-by-trial amplitude modulation analyses were used to delineate brain areas underlying decision-making in the context of approach/avoidance behavior. Conflict trials as compared to the nonconflict trials elicited greater activation within bilateral anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula, and caudate, as well as right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC). Right caudate and lateral PFC activation was modulated by level of reward offered. Individuals who showed greater caudate activation exhibited less approach behavior. On a trial-by-trial basis, greater right lateral PFC activation related to less approach behavior. Taken together, results suggest that the degree of activation within prefrontal-striatal-insula circuitry determines the degree of approach versus avoidance decision-making. Moreover, the degree of caudate and lateral PFC activation related to individual differences in approach-avoidance decision-making. Therefore, the approach-avoidance conflict paradigm is ideally suited to probe anxiety-related processing differences during approach-avoidance decision-making.

Dataset Information

Single-trial EEG dissociates motivation and conflict processes during decision-making under risk.

Publications

Single-trial EEG dissociates motivation and conflict processes during decision-making under risk.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure