Enhanced striatal and prefrontal activity is associated with individual differences in nonreinforced preference change for faces

Salomon, Tom; Botvinik‐Nezer, Rotem; Oren, Shiran; Schönberg, Tom

doi:10.1002/hbm.24859

Cited by 17 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are in line with previous reports of choice-induced preference changes (Ariely & Norton, 2008;Brehm, 1956;Izuma et al, 2010;Sharot et al, 2010) and conceptually replicate studies showing changes in stimulus valuation by cued approach training (CAT) (Aridan, Pelletier, Fellows, & Schonberg, 2019;Botvinik-Nezer, Bakkour, Salomon, Shohamy, & Schonberg, 2019;Salomon, Botvinik-Nezer, Oren, & Schonberg, 2019;Schonberg et al, 2014). Similar to the present approach, performance of a button press ("go" response) upon presentation of "go" stimuli during CAT reliably induces long-term nonreinforced changes of desirability and choice probabilities of "go" stimuli over "no-go" stimuli.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Decisions bias future choices by modifying hippocampal associative memories

Luettgau

Tempelmann

Kaiser

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision making is guided by memories of option values. However, retrieving items from memory renders them malleable. Here, we show that merely retrieving values from memory and making a choice between options is sufficient both to induce changes to stimulus-reward associations in the hippocampus and to bias future decision making. After allowing participants to make repeated choices between reward-conditioned stimuli, in the absence of any outcome, we observed that participants preferred stimuli they had previously chosen, and neglected previously unchosen stimuli, over otherwise identical-valued options. Using functional brain imaging, we show that decisions induced changes to hippocampal representations of stimulusoutcome associations. These changes were correlated with future decision biases. Our results indicate that choice-induced preference changes are partially driven by choice-induced modification of memory representations and suggest that merely making a choice -even without experiencing any outcomes -induces associative plasticity. Results Behavioral ExperimentsFirst, we detailed the behavioral choice-induced revaluation effect in three independent experiments. In each experiment, participants learnt associations between neutrally rated CS and three food items (Blechert, Meule, Busch, & Ohla, 2014) serving as unconditioned stimuli (US, Fig. 1A). For each participant, the US were individually chosen based on a prior rating of subjective preference on a visual analog scale ranging from low to high preference. This rating procedure resulted in selection of a low-value (US -), an intermediate-value (US 0 ) and a highvalue (US + ) food item. Next, participants rated kanji stimuli according to their subjective preference. Six of these kanjis rated in close proximity to "neutral" (center point of the visual analog scale) were selected as CS for Pavlovian learning. Two CS each were paired with one US, resulting in three categories of differently valued CS: CS + A/B, CS 0 A/B and CS -A/B, for high-, intermediate-and low-value CS.The Pavlovian learning phase was followed by a choice-induced revaluation. From two value categories, one CS each was selected, and participants made binary choices between them, interspersed with lure decisions between non-reward-predictive kanjis (Fig. 1B).Crucially, no associated US were presented following choices, excluding the possibility of alterations in strength of stimulus-outcome associations due to directly experienced outcomes.The choice-induced revaluation phase was followed by a decision probe phase in which participants chose repeatedly between all binary CS combinations to assess preferences (Fig. 1C). The key comparison was between CS presented during revaluation versus CS from the same value category that had not been presented. Again, no outcomes were presented. Decisions are biased by past choicesThere was evidence for value transfer from US to CS across all studies ( Fig. 1E-H), as indicated by significant main effects of CS value on probe phase choice probabilit...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Decisions bias future choices by modifying hippocampal associative memories

Luettgau

Tempelmann

Kaiser

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…configural) object representations that this region supports. This is compatible with previous findings that the change in value of faces and objects is associated with changes in face and object processing regions, respectively (Botvinik-Nezer et al, 2020; Salomon et al, 2020), arguing that value learning and storage occurs partly through experience-dependent plasticity in sensory cortex (Schonberg and Katz, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The pre-registered model did not include accuracy confound regressors (one for value modulation during object presentation and one for value-modulation during value rating), which we added after behavioural data analysis revealed a trend difference in accuracy between conditions. We also controlled for reaction times differently than what was stated in the pre-registration, this was done due to a mistake in the pre-registered analysis plan that was different from the usual process of accounting for RT (Botvinik-Nezer, Salomon, and Schonberg 2020; Salomon et al 2020; Schonberg et al 2014). These changes to the GLM make the model more stringent and allow for a clearer interpretation of the value-related activations reported here, ruling out the possibility that they might reflect reaction-time or difficulty/accuracy.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most substantial deviation from the preregistered analysis concerns the main GLM defined for fMRI analysis. We controlled for reaction times differently than what was stated in the preregistration, this was done due to a mistake in the preregistered analysis plan that proposed an approach different from the usual process of accounting for RT (Schonberg et al, 2014; Botvinik-Nezer et al, 2020; Salomon et al, 2020). We also carried out supplementary fMRI analyses including accuracy confound regressors in the GLM after behavioural analysis revealed a trend difference in accuracy between conditions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A preferential role for ventromedial prefrontal cortex in assessing “the value of the whole” in multi-attribute object evaluation

Pelletier

Aridan

Fellows

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Everyday decision-making commonly involves assigning values to complex objects with multiple value-relevant attributes. Drawing on what is known about complex object recognition, we hypothesized two routes to multi-attribute evaluation: assessing the value of the whole object based on attribute configuration, or summing individual attribute-values. In two samples of healthy human participants undergoing eye-tracking and fMRI while evaluating novel pseudo-objects, we found evidence for distinct forms of multi-attribute evaluation. Fixations to, and transitions between attributes differed systematically when value was associated with individual attributes or attribute configurations. Further, ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and the perirhinal cortex were engaged during evaluation specifically when configural processing was required. These results converge with our recent findings that damage to vmPFC disrupts decisions when evaluation requires configural processing, and not in evaluating "the sum of the parts". This suggests that multi-attribute decisions may engage distinct evaluation mechanisms relying on partially dissociable neural substrates.

show abstract

“…Second, although the effect of CAT on choices has been shown repeatedly (e.g., Bakkour et al, 2016;Schonberg et al, 2014;, to date only a few experiments examined whether CAT increases visual attention for cued over uncued items (Salomon et al, 2019;Schonberg et al, 2014), and only one experiment showed this effect (Schonberg et al, 2014). Thus, it could also be that this initially reported effect of CAT on visual attention is not so robust as the behavioural effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Training Choices Toward Low Value Options

Zoltak¹,

Holland²,

Kukken³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food decisions are driven by the differences in value such that high value items are preferred over low value items. However, recent research has demonstrated that by implementing the Cue- Approach Task (CAT) the odds of choosing low value items over high value items can be increased. This effect was explained by increased attention to the low value items induced by CAT. Our goal was replicate original findings and to address the question of the underlying mechanism by employing eye-tracking during participants’ choice making. Within the CAT participants were presented with images of food items and were instructed to quickly respond to some of them when an auditory cue was presented (cued items), and not without this cue (uncued items). Next, participants made choices between two food items that differed on whether they were cued in the CAT (cued versus uncued) and value (high versus low). Results showed participants were more likely to select a low value food item over a high value food item for consumption when the low value food item had been cued compared to when the low value item had not been cued. Important, and against our expectation, there was no significant increase in gaze time for low cued items compared to low uncued items. Participants did spend more time fixating on the chosen item compared to the unchosen alternative, thus replicating previous work in this domain. The present research thus establishes the robustness of CAT as means of facilitating choices for low value over high value food but could not demonstrate that this increased preference was due to increased attention for cued low value items. The present research thus raises the question how CAT may increase choices for low value options.

show abstract

Enhanced striatal and prefrontal activity is associated with individual differences in nonreinforced preference change for faces

Cited by 17 publications

References 68 publications

Decisions bias future choices by modifying hippocampal associative memories

Decisions bias future choices by modifying hippocampal associative memories

A preferential role for ventromedial prefrontal cortex in assessing “the value of the whole” in multi-attribute object evaluation

Training Choices Toward Low Value Options

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About