Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.
Stressful events are often vividly remembered. Although generally adaptive to survival, this emotional-memory enhancement may contribute to stress-related disorders. We tested here whether the enhanced memory for stressful events is due to the expectancy violation evoked by these events. Ninety-four men and women underwent a stressful or control episode. Critically, to manipulate the degree of expectancy violation, we gave participants either detailed or minimal information about the stressor. Although the subjective and hormonal stress responses were comparable in informed and uninformed participants, prior information about the stressor abolished the memory advantage for core features of the stressful event, tested 7 days later. Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy, we further linked the expectancy violation and memory formation under stress to the inferior temporal cortex. These data are the first to show that detailed information about an upcoming stressor and, by implication, a reduced expectancy violation attenuates the memory for stressful events.
Balancing the exploration of new options and the exploitation of known options is a fundamental challenge in decision-making, yet the mechanisms involved in this balance are not fully understood. Here, we aimed to elucidate the distinct roles of dopamine and noradrenaline in the exploration-exploitation tradeoff during human choice. To this end, we used a double-blind, placebo-controlled design in which participants received either a placebo, 400 mg of the D2/D3 receptor antagonist amisulpride, or 40 mg of the β-adrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol before they completed a virtual patch-foraging task probing exploration and exploitation. We systematically varied the rewards associated with choice options, the rate by which rewards decreased over time, and the opportunity costs it took to switch to the next option to disentangle the contributions of dopamine and noradrenaline to specific choice aspects. Our data show that amisulpride increased the sensitivity to all of these three critical choice features, whereas propranolol was associated with a reduced tendency to use value information. Our findings provide novel insights into the specific roles of dopamine and noradrenaline in the regulation of human choice behavior, suggesting a critical involvement of dopamine in directed exploration and a role of noradrenaline in more random exploration.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.