Is Avoiding an Aversive Outcome Rewarding? Neural Substrates of Avoidance Learning in the Human Brain

Abstract

Avoidance learning poses a challenge for reinforcement-based theories of instrumental conditioning, because once an aversive outcome is successfully avoided an individual may no longer experience extrinsic reinforcement for their behavior. One possible account for this is to propose that avoiding an aversive outcome is in itself a reward, and thus avoidance behavior is positively reinforced on each trial when the aversive outcome is successfully avoided. In the present study we aimed to test this possibility by determining whether avoidance of an aversive outcome recruits the same neural circuitry as that elicited by a reward itself. We scanned 16 human participants with functional MRI while they performed an instrumental choice task, in which on each trial they chose from one of two actions in order to either win money or else avoid losing money. Neural activity in a region previously implicated in encoding stimulus reward value, the medial orbitofrontal cortex, was found to increase, not only following receipt of reward, but also following successful avoidance of an aversive outcome. This neural signal may itself act as an intrinsic reward, thereby serving to reinforce actions during instrumental avoidance.

Neural correlates of mentalizing-related computations during strategic interactions in humans

“…Our computational modeling approach also allowed us to separate out prediction error signals arising from simple RL from those arising from the more complex influence updating mechanism, because the update of expectations in the full influence model is accomplished by a combination of these two signals. When we tested for the presence of prediction error signals arising from the RL component of the model we found significant correlations with those signals in the ventral striatum bilaterally, consistent with many previous reports (21,26,27). This signal is independent and dissociable from the influence update signal present instead in pSTS.…”

Hypothetical and Real Choice Differentially Activate Common Valuation Areas

“…This finding is particularly interesting because several studies of real choice have found that the activity in the area of mOFC identified here correlates with the value of receiving food, pleasant smells, attractive faces, and abstract rewards such as money or avoiding an aversive outcome (O'Doherty et al, 2001Small et al, 2001;Anderson et al, 2003;Gottfried et al, 2003;Kim et al, 2006), and also with the value of stimuli during real simple choices (Plassmann et al, 2007;Hare et al, 2008).…”

Free-Operant Avoidance Behavior by Rats after Reinforcer Revaluation Using Opioid Agonists and d-Amphetamine

“…Our previous studies have indicated that free-operant avoidance behavior is affected by catecholamine manipulations of the NAcS, but not the NAc core subregion, suggesting some specificity of the NacS in avoidance behavior supported by appetitive-aversive interactions (Fernando et al, 2013c). Furthermore, connected regions of the NacS, such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and amygdala, have also been implicated in avoidance behavior, acting as interfaces for appetitive and aversive influences (Wilensky et al, 2000;Kim et al, 2006;Prévost et al, 2011;Moscarello and LeDoux, 2013;Fernando et al, 2013a). The dual role of the NacS in both appetitive and aversive processing suggests that the mechanism by which revaluation of the shock occurred with infusions of DAMGO differed between the NacS and PAG, with each region potentially mediating a different aspect of pain experience.…”