Task preparation processes related to reward prediction precede those related to task-difficulty expectation.

Recently, attempts have been made to disentangle the neural underpinnings of preparatory processes related to reward and attention. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research showed that neural activity related to the anticipation of reward and to attentional demands invokes neural activity patterns featuring large-scale overlap, along with some differences and interactions. Due to the limited temporal resolution of fMRI, however, the temporal dynamics of these processes remain unclear. Here, we report an event-related potentials (ERP) study in which cued attentional demands and reward prospect were combined in a factorial design. Results showed that reward prediction dominated early cue processing, as well as the early and later parts of the contingent negative variation (CNV) slow-wave ERP component that has been associated with task-preparation processes. Moreover these reward-related electrophysiological effects correlated across participants with response time speeding on reward-prospect trials. In contrast, cued attentional demands affected only the later part of the CNV, with the highest amplitudes following cues predicting high-difficulty potential-reward targets, thus suggesting maximal task preparation when the task requires it and entails reward prospect. Consequently, we suggest that task-preparation processes triggered by reward can arise earlier, and potentially more directly, than strategic top-down aspects of preparation based on attentional demands.

Schevernels H ，Krebs RM ，Santens P ，Woldorff MG ，Boehler CN ... -  《-》

Utilization of reward-prospect enhances preparatory attention and reduces stimulus conflict.

van den Berg B ，Krebs RM ，Lorist MM ，Woldorff MG ... -  《-》

Preparing for (valenced) action: The role of differential effort in the orthogonalized go/no-go task.

Associating reward to task performance has been shown to benefit scores of cognitive functions. Importantly, this typically entails associating reward to the execution of a response, hence intertwining action-related processes with motivational ones. However, recently, preparatory action requirements (go/no-go) and outcome valence (reward/punishment) were elegantly separated using a cued orthogonalized go/no-go task. Functional magnetic resonance imaging results from this task showed that typical areas of the "reward network," like the dopaminergic midbrain and the striatum, predominantly encode action rather than valence, displaying enhanced activity when preparing for action (go) compared to inaction (no-go). In the current study, we used ERPs to probe for differences in preparatory state related to cognitive effort in this task, which has similarly been linked to reward-network activity. Importantly, the contingent negative variation, which is linked to effortful cognitive preparation processes during cue-target intervals, was clearly observed in go trials but not in no-go trials. Moreover, target-locked ERP results (N1 and P3) suggested that attention to the target was enhanced when an action had to be performed (go trials), and typical inhibition-related ERP components were not observed in no-go trials, suggesting a lack of active response inhibition. Finally, feedback-related P3 results could suggest that correct feedback was valued more in motivated go trials, again implying that more effort was required to correctly perform the task. Together, these results indicate that the anticipation of action compared to inaction simultaneously entails differences in mental effort, highlighting the need for further dissociation of these concepts.

Schevernels H ，Bombeke K ，Krebs RM ，Boehler CN ... -  《-》

Teasing apart the anticipatory and consummatory processing of monetary incentives: An event-related potential study of reward dynamics.

The monetary incentive delay (MID) task has been widely used in fMRI studies to investigate the neural networks involved in anticipatory and consummatory reward processing. Previous efforts to adapt the MID task for use with ERPs, however, have had limited success. Here, we sought to further decompose reward dynamics using a comprehensive set of anticipatory (cue-N2, cue-P3, contingent negative variation [CNV]) and consummatory ERPs (feedback negativity [FN], feedback P3 [fb-P3]). ERP data was recorded during adapted versions of the MID task across two experiments. Unlike previous studies, monetary incentive cues modulated the cue-N2, cue-P3, and CNV; however, cue-related ERPs and the CNV were uncorrelated with one another, indicating distinct anticipatory subprocesses. With regard to consummatory processing, FN amplitude primarily tracked outcome valence (reward vs. nonreward), whereas fb-P3 amplitude primarily tracked outcome salience (uncertain vs. certain). Independent modulation of the cue-P3 and fb-P3 was observed, indicating that these two P3 responses may uniquely capture the allocation of attention during anticipatory and consummatory reward processing, respectively. Overall, across two samples, consistent evidence of both anticipatory and consummatory ERP activity was observed on an adapted version of the MID paradigm, demonstrating for the first time how these ERP components may be integrated with one another to more fully characterize the time course of reward processing. This ERP-MID paradigm is well suited to parsing reward dynamics, and can be applied to both healthy and clinical populations.

Novak KD ，Foti D 《-》

Motivated to win: Relationship between anticipatory and outcome reward-related neural activity.

Reward-processing involves two temporal stages characterized by two distinct neural processes: reward-anticipation and reward-outcome. Intriguingly, very little research has examined the relationship between neural processes involved in reward-anticipation and reward-outcome. To investigate this, one needs to consider the heterogeneity of reward-processing within each stage. To identify different stages of reward processing, we adapted a reward time-estimation task. While EEG data were recorded, participants were instructed to button-press 3.5s after the onset of an Anticipation-Cue and received monetary reward for good time-estimation on the Reward trials, but not on No-Reward trials. We first separated reward-anticipation into event related potentials (ERPs) occurring at three sub-stages: reward/no-reward cue-evaluation, motor-preparation and feedback-anticipation. During reward/no-reward cue-evaluation, the Reward-Anticipation Cue led to a smaller N2 and larger P3. During motor-preparation, we report, for the first time, that the Reward-Anticipation Cue enhanced the Readiness Potential (RP), starting approximately 1s before movement. At the subsequent feedback-anticipation stage, the Reward-Anticipation Cue elevated the Stimulus-Preceding Negativity (SPN). We also separated reward-outcome ERPs into different components occurring at different time-windows: the Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN), Feedback-P3 (FB-P3) and Late-Positive Potentials (LPP). Lastly, we examined the relationship between reward-anticipation and reward-outcome ERPs. We report that individual-differences in specific reward-anticipation ERPs uniquely predicted specific reward-outcome ERPs. In particular, the reward-anticipation Early-RP (1-.8s before movement) predicted early reward-outcome ERPs (FRN and FB-P3), whereas, the reward-anticipation SPN most strongly predicted a later reward-outcome ERP (LPP). Results have important implications for understanding the nature of the relationship between reward-anticipation and reward-outcome neural-processes.

Pornpattananangkul N ，Nusslock R 《-》