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]

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]

Amidst the replicability crisis, promoting transparency and rigor in research becomes imperative. The Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer (PIT) paradigm is increasingly used in human studies to offer insights into how Pavlovian cues, by anticipating rewards or punishments, influence decision-making and potentially contribute to the development of clinical conditions. However, research on this topic faces challenges, including methodological variability and the need for standardized approaches, which can undermine the quality and robustness of experimental findings. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to unravel the methodological, task-related, individual, training, and learning factors that can modulate PIT. By scrutinizing these factors, the present meta-analysis reviews the current literature on human PIT, provides practical guidelines for future research to enhance study outcomes and refine methodologies, and identifies knowledge gaps that can serve as a direction for future studies aiming to advance the comprehension of how Pavlovian cues shape decision-making., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)