bioRxiv ScienceSearch

Biology subjects

Steven W Kennerley

Publications and source records attributed to Steven W Kennerley.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Neural signatures of value comparison in human cingulate cortex during decisions requiring an effort-reward trade-off

Integrating costs and benefits is crucial for optimal decision-making. While much is known about decisions that involve outcome-related costs (e.g., delay, risk), many of our choices are attached to actions and require an evaluation of the associated motor costs. Yet how the brain incorporates motor costs into choices remains largely unclear. We used human functional magnetic resonance imaging during choices involving monetary reward and physical effort to identify brain regions that serve as a choice comparator for effort-reward trade-offs. By independently varying both options' effort and reward levels, we were able to identify the neural signature of a comparator mechanism. A network involving supplementary motor area (SMA) and the caudal portion of dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) encoded the difference in reward (positively) and effort levels (negatively) between chosen and unchosen choice options. We next modelled effort-discounted subjective values using a novel behavioural model. This revealed that the same network of regions involving dACC and SMA encoded the difference between the chosen and unchosen options' subjective values, and that activity was best described using a concave model of effort-discounting. In addition, this signal reflected how precisely value determined participants' choices. By contrast, separate signals in SMA and ventro-medial PFC (vmPFC) correlated with participants' tendency to avoid effort and seek reward, respectively. This suggests that the critical neural signature of decision-making for choices involving motor costs is found in human cingulate cortex and not vmPFC as typically reported for outcome-based choice. Furthermore, distinct frontal circuits drive behaviour towards reward-maximization and effort-minimization.\n\nSignificance StatementThe neural processes that govern the trade-off between expected benefits and motor costs remain largely unknown. This is striking because energetic requirements play an integral role in our day-to-day choices and instrumental behaviour, and a diminished willingness to exert effort is a characteristic feature of a range of neurological disorders. We use a new behavioural characterization of how humans trade-off reward-maximization with effort-minimization to examine the neural signatures that underpin such choices, using BOLD MRI neuroimaging data. We find the critical neural signature of decision-making, a signal that reflects the comparison of value between choice options, in human cingulate cortex, whereas two distinct brain circuits drive behaviour towards reward-maximization or effort-minimization.

Neuroscience

Approach-induced biases in human information sampling

Information sampling is often biased towards seeking evidence that confirms ones prior beliefs. Despite such biases being a pervasive feature of human behavior, their underlying causes remain unclear. Many accounts of these biases appeal to limitations of human hypothesis testing and cognition, de facto evoking notions of bounded rationality, but neglect more basic aspects of behavioral control. Here we demonstrate involvement of Pavlovian approach biases in determining which information humans will choose to sample. We collected a large novel dataset from 32,445 human subjects, making over 3 million decisions, who played a gambling task designed to measure the latent causes and extent of information-sampling biases. We identified three novel approach-related biases, formalized by comparing subject behavior to a dynamic programming model of optimal information gathering. These biases reflected the amount of information sampled ( positive evidence approach), the selection of which information to sample ( sampling the favorite), and the interaction between information sampling and subsequent choices ( rejecting unsampled options). The prevalence of all three biases was related to a Pavlovian approach-avoid parameter quantified within an entirely independent economic decision task. Our large dataset also revealed that individual differences in information seeking are a stable trait across multiple gameplays, and can be related to demographic measures including age and educational attainment. As well as revealing limitations in cognitive processing, our findings suggest information sampling biases reflect the expression of primitive, yet potentially ecologically adaptive, behavioral repertoires. One such behavior is sampling from options that will eventually be chosen, even when other sources of information are more pertinent for guiding future action.

Animal Behavior and Cognition