Brain signatures of monetary loss and gain: Outcome-related potentials in a single outcome gambling task

Abstract

This study evaluates the event-related potential (ERP) components in a single outcome gambling task that involved monetary losses and gains. The participants were 50 healthy young volunteers (25 males and 25 females). The gambling task involved valence (loss and gain) and amount (50¢ and 10¢) as outcomes. The outcome-related negativity (ORN/N2) and outcome-related positivity (ORP/ P3) were analyzed and compared across conditions and gender. Monetary gain (compared to loss) and higher amount (50¢ compared to 10¢) produced higher amplitudes and shorter latencies in both ORN and ORP components. Difference wave plots showed that earlier processing (200-400 ms) is dominated by the valence (loss/gain) while later processing (after 400 ms) is marked by the amount (50¢/10¢). Functional mapping using Low Resolution Electromagnetic Tomography (LORETA) indicated that the ORN separated the loss against gain in both genders, while the ORP activity distinguished the 50¢ against 10¢ in males. This study further strengthens the view that separate brain processes/circuitry may mediate loss and gain. Although there were no gender differences in behavioral and impulsivity scores, ORN and ORP measures for different task conditions had significant correlations with behavioral scores. This gambling paradigm may potentially offer valuable indicators to study outcome processing and impulsivity in normals as well as in clinical populations.

Age-related characteristics of risky decision-making and progressive expectation formation

“…The amplitude of the P3 is usually defined as a correlate of the depth of elaborative processing and analysis of the incoming information [27,28]. Thus, when the reward positivity was observed with larger amplitude -possibly indicating a more intensive positive prediction error signaling -it was followed by a P3 with larger amplitude presumably corresponding to a higher level of elaborative processing.…”

“…The reward positivity occurs with larger amplitude for unexpected than expected rewarding events [26]; thus, it can be regarded as a decisive index of outcome evaluation which reliably reflects the predictive processing. In addition, both the FRN and the reward positivity ERP components typically constitute a 'complex' with the following P3 component peaking at approximately between 300 and 500 ms [27][28][29]. The P3 is thought to reflect a more thorough evaluative process of the outcome events [30][31][32], including the local and global probabilistic properties, motivational significance of the stimuli, and also the amount of expended/invested attention [33].…”

Age-dependent characteristics of feedback evaluation related to monetary gains and losses

“…The feedback associated P3 can be defined as a positivity peaking between 300-500 ms post-stimulus (Kamarajan et al, 2009;West, Bailey, Anderson, & Kieffaber, 2014;Wu & Zhou, 2009;Yeung & Sanfey, 2004), and it represents the process of elaborative evaluation of outcome reflecting the functional significance of stimuli (Gu et al, 2011;Lole, Gonsalvez, Barry, & De Blasio, 2013;Zhang et al, 2013). Two subtypes of the P3 component (P3a and P3b) can be defined with different scalp distributions and generator mechanisms (Polich & Criado, 2006;Squires, Squires, & Hillyard, 1975).…”

“…found to correspond to an evaluative process reflecting on the magnitude of reward or punishment and the risk associated with a particular outcome, but was considered to be insensitive to the valence of outcome (Christie & Tata, 2009;Kamarajan et al, 2009;Yeung & Sanfey, 2004).…”

“…16 (Kamarajan et al, 2009), if the subjects would have taken the smaller stake because of expected loss in a given trial, small gain outcomes should have elicited larger FRN than small losses. The present results, however, showing that the FRN was more sensitive to negative outcomes (large and small losses as well) in the young suggest that these negative events were reflected by an evaluation process along the good-bad (gain-loss) dimension.…”