Search

Reward-predictive cues can affect decision-making by enhancing instrumental responses toward the same (specific transfer) or similar (general transfer) rewards. The main theories on cue-guided decision-making consider specific transfer as driven by the activation of previously learned instrumental actions induced by cues sharing the sensory-specific properties of the reward they are associated with. However, to date, such theoretical assumption has never been directly investigated at the neural level. We hypothesize that such reactivation occurs within the premotor system and could be mapped by lateralized beta (12-30 Hz) desynchronization, a widely used marker of action selection and decision-making policy. To test this hypothesis, 42 participants (22 females) performed a pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer paradigm, while electroencephalographic activity was recorded. We anticipated increased beta desynchronization during the transfer phase when cues promoting specific transfer were presented, compared with cues predicting general transfer and neutral cues. The evidence collected confirmed our hypothesis, thus providing the first neural evidence in favor of the theorized reactivation of instrumental actions and corroborating the presence of two dissociable neural pathways underpinning specific and general transfer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability to flexibly adjust one's threat predictions to meet the current environmental contingencies is crucial to survival. Nevertheless, its neural oscillatory correlates remain elusive in humans. Here, we tested whether changes in theta and alpha brain oscillations mark the updating of threat predictions and correlate with response of the peripheral nervous system. To this end, electroencephalogram and electrodermal activity were recorded in a group of healthy adults, who completed a Pavlovian threat conditioning task that included an acquisition and a reversal phase. Both theta and alpha power discriminated between threat and safety, with each frequency band showing unique patterns of modulations during acquisition and reversal. While changes in midcingulate theta power may learn the timing of an upcoming danger, alpha power may reflect the preparation of the somato‐motor system. Additionally, ventromedial prefrontal cortex theta may play a role in the inhibition of previously acquired threat responses, when they are no longer appropriate. Finally, theta and alpha power correlated with skin conductance response, establishing a direct relationship between activation of the central and peripheral nervous systems. Taken together these results highlight the existence of multiple oscillatory systems that flexibly regulate their activity for the successful expression of threat responses in an ever‐changing environment. The ability to flexibly readjust one's threat predictions to meet the current environmental contingencies is crucial to survival. Nevertheless, its neural oscillatory correlates remain elusive in humans. Our results uncover the role of theta and alpha oscillations in the acquisition and reversal of threat predictions and their correlation with skin conductance response, establishing a direct relationship between activation of the central and peripheral nervous systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When repeatedly paired with rewarding outcomes (i.e., Pavlovian conditioning), environmental cues may acquire predictive and motivational significance and later enhance instrumental responding for the same (i.e., outcome-specific transfer) or motivationally similar (i.e., general transfer) outcomes. Although outcome-specific and general Pavlovian-to- Instrumental Transfer (PIT) are characterized by different neural substrates and behavioral mechanisms, general transfer has never been studied in isolation from outcome-specific transfer in humans. The first aim of the present study was to test whether the general transfer effect could emerge in isolation and independently of outcome-specific transfer. Our results showed that general transfer can be elicited without the concurrent presence of outcome-specific transfer, supporting the idea that outcome-specific and general transfer can be studied independently of each other. The second aim of the present study was to clarify whether the affordance-like properties of the outcomes can affect the general transfer. In fact, a critical difference in current studies on general transfer concerns the use of cues associated with outcomes for which an action was previously learned (or not) during the instrumental training. This apparently minor difference affects the affordance-like properties of the outcome and may also be transferred to the cue, in turn impacting general transfer. Results revealed a general transfer of the same magnitude regardless of whether cues were associated with reward earned or not during instrumental conditioning. These findings increase the current knowledge on the incentive motivational mechanism behind general transfer, indicating that it is independent of the motor features of the outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]