Search

Risk is a fundamental factor affecting individual and social economic decisions, but its neural correlates are largely unexplored in the social domain. The amygdala, together with the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), is thought to play a central role in risk-taking. Here, we investigated in human volunteers ( n  = 20; 11 females) how risk (defined as the variance of reward probability distributions) in a social situation affects decisions and concomitant neural activity as measured with fMRI. We found separate variance-risk signals for social and nonsocial outcomes in the amygdala. Specifically, amygdala activity increased parametrically with social reward variance of presented choice options and on separate trials with nonsocial reward variance. Behaviorally, 75% of participants were averse to social risk as estimated in a Becker-DeGroot-Marschak auction-like procedure. The stronger this aversion, the more negative the coupling between risk-related amygdala regions and dACC. This negative relation was significant for social risk attitude but not for the attitude toward variance-risk in juice outcomes. Our results indicate that the amygdala and its coupling with dACC process objective and subjectively evaluated social risk. Moreover, while social risk can be captured with a framework originally established by finance theory for nonsocial risk, the amygdala appears to process social risk largely separately from nonsocial risk., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing financial interest., (Copyright © 2024 the authors.)

Although overconsumption of high-fat foods is a major driver of weight gain, the neural mechanisms that link the oral sensory properties of dietary fat to reward valuation and eating behavior remain unclear. Here we combine novel food-engineering approaches with functional neuroimaging to show that the human orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) translates oral sensations evoked by high-fat foods into subjective economic valuations that guide eating behavior. Male and female volunteers sampled and evaluated nutrient-controlled liquid foods that varied in fat and sugar ("milkshakes"). During oral food processing, OFC activity encoded a specific oral-sensory parameter that mediated the influence of the foods' fat content on reward value: the coefficient of sliding friction. Specifically, OFC responses to foods in the mouth reflected the smooth, oily texture (i.e., mouthfeel) produced by fatty liquids on oral surfaces. Distinct activity patterns in OFC encoded the economic values associated with particular foods, which reflected the subjective integration of sliding friction with other food properties (sugar, fat, viscosity). Critically, neural sensitivity of OFC to oral texture predicted individuals' fat preferences in a naturalistic eating test: individuals whose OFC was more sensitive to fat-related oral texture consumed more fat during ad libitum eating. Our findings suggest that reward systems of the human brain sense dietary fat from oral sliding friction, a mechanical food parameter that likely governs our daily eating experiences by mediating interactions between foods and oral surfaces. These findings identify a specific role for the human OFC in evaluating oral food textures to mediate preference for high-fat foods. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Fat and sugar enhance the reward value of food by imparting a sweet taste and rich mouthfeel but also contribute to overeating and obesity. Here we used a novel food-engineering approach to realistically quantify the physical-mechanical properties of high-fat liquid foods on oral surfaces and used functional neuroimaging while volunteers sampled these foods and placed monetary bids to consume them. We found that a specific area of the brain's reward system, the orbitofrontal cortex, detects the smooth texture of fatty foods in the mouth and links these sensory inputs to economic valuations that guide eating behavior. These findings can inform the design of low-calorie fat-replacement foods that mimic the impact of dietary fat on oral surfaces and neural reward systems., (Copyright © 2023 Khorisantono et al.)

In reinforcement learning (RL), animals choose by assigning values to options and learn by updating these values from reward outcomes. This framework has been instrumental in identifying fundamental learning variables and their neuronal implementations. However, canonical RL models do not explain how reward values are constructed from biologically critical intrinsic reward components, such as nutrients. From an ecological perspective, animals should adapt their foraging choices in dynamic environments to acquire nutrients that are essential for survival. Here, to advance the biological and ecological validity of RL models, we investigated how (male) monkeys adapt their choices to obtain preferred nutrient rewards under varying reward probabilities. We found that the nutrient composition of rewards strongly influenced learning and choices. Preferences of the animals for specific nutrients (sugar, fat) affected how they adapted to changing reward probabilities; the history of recent rewards influenced choices of the monkeys more strongly if these rewards contained the their preferred nutrients (nutrient-specific reward history). The monkeys also chose preferred nutrients even when they were associated with lower reward probability. A nutrient-sensitive RL model captured these processes; it updated the values of individual sugar and fat components of expected rewards based on experience and integrated them into subjective values that explained the choices of the monkeys. Nutrient-specific reward prediction errors guided this value-updating process. Our results identify nutrients as important reward components that guide learning and choice by influencing the subjective value of choice options. Extending RL models with nutrient-value functions may enhance their biological validity and uncover nutrient-specific learning and decision variables. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT RL is an influential framework that formalizes how animals learn from experienced rewards. Although reward is a foundational concept in RL theory, canonical RL models cannot explain how learning depends on specific reward properties, such as nutrients. Intuitively, learning should be sensitive to the nutrient components of the reward to benefit health and survival. Here, we show that the nutrient (fat, sugar) composition of rewards affects how the monkeys choose and learn in an RL paradigm and that key learning variables including reward history and reward prediction error should be modified with nutrient-specific components to account for the choice behavior observed in the monkeys. By incorporating biologically critical nutrient rewards into the RL framework, our findings help advance the ecological validity of RL models., (Copyright © 2023 the authors.)

Expected Utility Theory (EUT), the first axiomatic theory of risky choice, describes choices as a utility maximization process: decision makers assign a subjective value (utility) to each choice option and choose the one with the highest utility. The continuity axiom, central to Expected Utility Theory and its modifications, is a necessary and sufficient condition for the definition of numerical utilities. The axiom requires decision makers to be indifferent between a gamble and a specific probabilistic combination of a more preferred and a less preferred gamble. While previous studies demonstrated that monkeys choose according to combinations of objective reward magnitude and probability, a concept-driven experimental approach for assessing the axiomatically defined conditions for maximizing utility by animals is missing. We experimentally tested the continuity axiom for a broad class of gamble types in 4 male rhesus macaque monkeys, showing that their choice behavior complied with the existence of a numerical utility measure as defined by the economic theory. We used the numerical quantity specified in the continuity axiom to characterize subjective preferences in a magnitude-probability space. This mapping highlighted a trade-off relation between reward magnitudes and probabilities, compatible with the existence of a utility function underlying subjective value computation. These results support the existence of a numerical utility function able to describe choices, allowing for the investigation of the neuronal substrates responsible for coding such rigorously defined quantity. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT A common assumption of several economic choice theories is that decisions result from the comparison of subjectively assigned values (utilities). This study demonstrated the compliance of monkey behavior with the continuity axiom of Expected Utility Theory, implying a subjective magnitude-probability trade-off relation, which supports the existence of numerical utility directly linked to the theoretical economic framework. We determined a numerical utility measure able to describe choices, which can serve as a correlate for the neuronal activity in the quest for brain structures and mechanisms guiding decisions., (Copyright © 2021 Ferrari-Toniolo et al.)

Rewarding choice options typically contain multiple components, but neural signals in single brain voxels are scalar and primarily vary up or down. In a previous study, we had designed reward bundles that contained the same two milkshakes with independently set amounts; we had used psychophysics and rigorous economic concepts to estimate two-dimensional choice indifference curves (ICs) that represented revealed stochastic preferences for these bundles in a systematic, integrated manner. All bundles on the same ICs were equally revealed preferred (and thus had same utility, as inferred from choice indifference); bundles on higher ICs (higher utility) were preferred to bundles on lower ICs (lower utility). In the current study, we used the established behavior for testing with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We now demonstrate neural responses in reward-related brain structures of human female and male participants, including striatum, midbrain, and medial orbitofrontal cortex (mid-OFC) that followed the characteristic pattern of ICs: similar responses along ICs (same utility despite different bundle composition), but monotonic change across ICs (different utility). Thus, these brain structures integrated multiple reward components into a scalar signal, well beyond the known subjective value coding of single-component rewards. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Rewards have several components, like the taste and size of an apple, but it is unclear how each component contributes to the overall value of the reward. While choice indifference curves (ICs) of economic theory provide behavioral approaches to this question, it is unclear whether brain responses capture the preference and utility integrated from multiple components. We report activations in striatum, midbrain, and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) that follow choice ICs representing behavioral preferences over and above variations of individual reward components. In addition, the concept-driven approach encourages future studies on natural, multicomponent rewards that are prone to irrational choice of normal and brain-damaged individuals., (Copyright © 2021 Seak, Volkmann et al.)

Artificial agents are becoming prevalent across human life domains. However, the neural mechanisms underlying human responses to these new, artificial social partners remain unclear. The uncanny valley (UV) hypothesis predicts that humans prefer anthropomorphic agents but reject them if they become too humanlike-the so-called UV reaction. Using fMRI, we investigated neural activity when subjects evaluated artificial agents and made decisions about them. Across two experimental tasks, the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) encoded an explicit representation of subjects' UV reactions. Specifically, VMPFC signaled the subjective likability of artificial agents as a nonlinear function of humanlikeness, with selective low likability for highly humanlike agents. In exploratory across-subject analyses, these effects explained individual differences in psychophysical evaluations and preference choices. Functionally connected areas encoded critical inputs for these signals: the temporoparietal junction encoded a linear humanlikeness continuum, whereas nonlinear representations of humanlikeness in dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) and fusiform gyrus emphasized a human-nonhuman distinction. Following principles of multisensory integration, multiplicative combination of these signals reconstructed VMPFC's valuation function. During decision making, separate signals in VMPFC and DMPFC encoded subjects' decision variable for choices involving humans or artificial agents, respectively. A distinct amygdala signal predicted rejection of artificial agents. Our data suggest that human reactions toward artificial agents are governed by a neural mechanism that generates a selective, nonlinear valuation in response to a specific feature combination (humanlikeness in nonhuman agents). Thus, a basic principle known from sensory coding-neural feature selectivity from linear-nonlinear transformation-may also underlie human responses to artificial social partners. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Would you trust a robot to make decisions for you? Autonomous artificial agents are increasingly entering our lives, but how the human brain responds to these new artificial social partners remains unclear. The uncanny valley (UV) hypothesis-an influential psychological framework-captures the observation that human responses to artificial agents are nonlinear: we like increasingly anthropomorphic artificial agents, but feel uncomfortable if they become too humanlike. Here we investigated neural activity when humans evaluated artificial agents and made personal decisions about them. Our findings suggest a novel neurobiological conceptualization of human responses toward artificial agents: the UV reaction-a selective dislike of highly humanlike agents-is based on nonlinear value-coding in ventromedial prefrontal cortex, a key component of the brain's reward system., (Copyright © 2019 Rosenthal-von der Pütten et al.)

Many affective stimuli are hedonically complex mixtures containing both pleasant and unpleasant components. To investigate whether the brain represents the overall affective value of such complex stimuli, or the affective value of the different components simultaneously, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure brain activations to a pleasant odor (jasmine), an unpleasant odor (indole), and a mixture of the two that was pleasant. In brain regions that represented the pleasantness of the odors such as the medial orbitofrontal cortex (as shown by activations that correlated with the pleasantness ratings), the mixture produced activations of similar magnitude to the pleasant jasmine, but very different from the unpleasant indole. These regions thus emphasize the pleasant aspects of the mixture. In contrast, in regions representing the unpleasantness of odors such as the dorsal anterior cingulate and midorbitofrontal cortex the mixture produced activations that were relatively further from the pleasant component jasmine and closer to the indole. These regions thus emphasize the unpleasant aspects of the mixture. Thus mixtures that are found pleasant can have components that are separately pleasant and unpleasant, and the brain can separately and simultaneously represent the positive and negative hedonic value of a complex affective stimulus that contains both pleasant and unpleasant olfactory components. This type of representation may be important for affective decision making in the brain in that separate representations of different affective components of the same sensory stimulus may provide the inputs for making a decision about whether to choose the stimulus or not.