Subjective preferences differentially modulate the processing of rewards gained by own vs. observed choices

Selective Devaluation Affects the Processing of Preferred Rewards

“…Consistent with reward magnitude effects in both FRN and P300, Peterburs et al ( 2019 ) recently reported that subjective reward preferences, corresponding to subjective reward magnitude, had a significant impact on the outcome-locked ERP in the time windows of FRN and P300, with more positive amplitudes for a preferred relative to a less liked food reward. Preference coding started as early as 170 ms after outcome onset and thus in the time window of the P2, an early positive ERP component that also has been shown to code outcome magnitude (Flores et al, 2015 ; Potts et al, 2006 ; San Martín et al, 2010 ).…”

“…Cluster-based permutation analysis of ERP data As in this study, we hypothesized to find effects in a larger time window spanning multiple ERP components (P2, FRN, and P300) with differing spatial distributions, we employed a clusterbased permutation analysis as implemented in the FieldTrip toolbox (version 20200409, www.fieldtriptoolbox.org; Oostenveld et al, 2011) to determine the spatiotemporal differences in the processing of the outcome types in the different valuation conditions. Note that this procedure also was used in a prior study on reward preferences by our group using the same task (Peterburs et al, 2019). Cluster-based permutation analysis is a nonparametric method to test for differences between experimental conditions in data with a high-dimensional spatiotemporal structure, such as EEG, while correcting for multiple comparisons prevalent in such data (Maris & Oostenveld, 2007).…”

“…1 Sequence and time course of stimulus presentation in one trial of the gambling task as well as outline of the general experimental procedure a priori selection of electrodes and time windows, it offers a more objective approach than classical ERP analyses which rely on challengeable choices of electrodes and time windows based on visual inspection and/or previous literature. We analysed data in several steps to account for our 2 x 3 experimental design, as the method does not allow us to consider more than one experimental factor at a time (Peterburs et al, 2019).…”

“…In the present study, we aimed to clarify whether the selective satiety effect extends to the manipulation of subjective preferences and how it is represented in the ERP. We tested a sample of healthy adults both with and without applying selective devaluation of a preferred outcome, using a variant of the gambling task introduced by Peterburs et al ( 2019 ), but with individually determined rewards of high, medium, and low preference. We hypothesised that selective devaluation of the high preference reward would affect the amplitude within the time windows of the P2, FRN, and P300 ERP components, such that preference coding in the ERP is maintained without selective devaluation but altered when selective devaluation is applied.…”

Amphetamine alters an EEG marker of reward processing in humans and mice

“…An emerging literature is revealing that appetitive motivation and affective value boost the RewP [22][23][24][25][26]. This dissociation might be critical for understanding altered reward dysfunction: for instance, major depression is associated with a diminished RewP but no change in the information representation of positive prediction error, suggesting that mood affects variance related to the generation of the signal (e.g.…”