Perceptual Salience and Reward Both Influence Feedback-Related Neural Activity Arising from Choice

被引:9
作者
Lou, Bin [1 ]
Hsu, Wha-Yin [1 ]
Sajda, Paul [1 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, New York, NY 10027 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
decision making; electroencephalography; perceptual salience; prediction error; reward; single trial; ERROR-RELATED NEGATIVITY; MEDIAL FRONTAL-CORTEX; TIME-ESTIMATION TASK; DECISION-MAKING; PREDICTION ERRORS; BRAIN POTENTIALS; ANTERIOR CINGULATE; COGNITIVE CONTROL; EXPECTED VALUE; EEG DYNAMICS;
D O I
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1601-15.2015
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
For day-to-day decisions, multiple factors influence our choice between alternatives. Two dimensions of decision making that substantially affect choice are the objective perceptual properties of the stimulus (e.g., salience) and its subjective value. Here we measure EEGs in human subjects to relate their feedback-evoked EEG responses to estimates of prediction error given a neurally derived expected value for each trial. Unlike in traditional reinforcement learning paradigms, in our experiment the reward itself is not probabilistic; rather, it is a fixed value, which, when combined with the variable stimulus salience, yields uncertainty in the choice. We find that feedback-evoked event-related potentials (ERPs), specifically those classically termed feedback-related negativity, are modulated by both the reward level and stimulus salience. Using single-trial analysis of the EEG, we show stimulus-locked EEG components reflecting perceived stimulus salience can be combined with the level of reward to create an estimate of expected reward. This expected reward is used to form a prediction error that correlates with the trial-by-trial variability of the feedback ERPs for negative, but not positive, feedback. This suggests that the valence of prediction error is more important than the valence of the actual feedback, since only positive rewards were delivered in the experiment (no penalty or loss). Finally, we show that these subjectively defined prediction errors are informative of the riskiness of the subject's choice on the subsequent trial. In summary, our work shows that neural correlates of stimulus salience interact with value information to yield neural representations of subjective expected reward.
引用
收藏
页码:13064 / 13075
页数:12
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]   Learning the value of information in an uncertain world [J].
Behrens, Timothy E. J. ;
Woolrich, Mark W. ;
Walton, Mark E. ;
Rushworth, Matthew F. S. .
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2007, 10 (09) :1214-1221
[2]   Shared Neural Markers of Decision Confidence and Error Detection [J].
Boldt, Annika ;
Yeung, Nick .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2015, 35 (08) :3478-3484
[3]   Contextual Novelty Modulates the Neural Dynamics of Reward Anticipation [J].
Bunzeck, Nico ;
Guitart-Masip, Marc ;
Dolan, Ray J. ;
Duezel, Emrah .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2011, 31 (36) :12816-12822
[4]   Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control [J].
Cavanagh, James F. ;
Frank, Michael J. .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2014, 18 (08) :414-421
[5]   Frontal theta links prediction errors to behavioral adaptation in reinforcement learning [J].
Cavanagh, James F. ;
Frank, Michael J. ;
Klein, Theresa J. ;
Allen, John J. B. .
NEUROIMAGE, 2010, 49 (04) :3198-3209
[6]   Prelude to and Resolution of an Error: EEG Phase Synchrony Reveals Cognitive Control Dynamics during Action Monitoring [J].
Cavanagh, James F. ;
Cohen, Michael X. ;
Allen, John J. B. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2009, 29 (01) :98-105
[7]  
Chen XS, 2013, LANCET INFECT DIS, V13, P13, DOI 10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70298-0
[8]   Reward expectation modulates feedback-related negativity and EEG spectra [J].
Cohen, Michael X. ;
Elger, Christian E. ;
Ranganath, Charan .
NEUROIMAGE, 2007, 35 (02) :968-978
[9]   Reinforcement learning signals predict future decisions [J].
Cohen, Michael X. ;
Ranganath, Charan .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2007, 27 (02) :371-378
[10]   Behavioral and neural predictors of upcoming decisions [J].
Cohen, MX ;
Ranganath, C .
COGNITIVE AFFECTIVE & BEHAVIORAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2005, 5 (02) :117-126