Relationship between Oscillatory Neuronal Activity during Reward Processing and Trait Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking

Leicht, Gregor; Troschütz, Stefan; Andreou, Christina; Karamatskos, Evangelos; Ertl, Matthias; Naber, Dieter; Mulert, Christoph

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083414

Cited by 43 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(103 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The similarities between BOA and dopaminergic neurons responses following rewards has led to the assumption that mesolimbic activations modulate this gain-related signal, a claim that has been indirectly supported by previous studies (Marco-Pallarés et al, 2009;Leicht et al, 2013). In parallel, intrarecording studies have shown that VTA neurons projecting to prefrontal cortex preferentially fire between 20 and 30 Hz, suggesting that dopaminergic projections might indeed generate BOA in prefrontal cortex (Lammel et al, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Previous Electroencephalography (EEG) and Magnetoencephalography (MEG) human studies using time-frequency (TF) decomposition have revealed a mid-frontal BOA elicited by positive outcomes (20-30 Hz, peaking 200-400 ms after positive feedback; Cohen et al, 2007;Marco-Pallarés et al, 2008;Marco-Pallarés et al, 2009;Cunillera et al, 2012;HajiHosseini et al, 2012;Leicht et al, 2013;Luft et al, 2013;Padrao et al, 2013) and reward-predicting cues (Bunzeck et al, 2011;Kawasaki and Yamaguchi, 2013;Apitz and Bunzeck, 2014). This gain-related signal has been associated to the engagement of rewardrelated brain networks due to the fact that BOA shows a similar pattern in response to rewards than that observed in midbrain dopaminergic and striatal neurons.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beta oscillations and reward processing: Coupling oscillatory activity and hemodynamic responses

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beta oscillations and reward processing: Coupling oscillatory activity and hemodynamic responses

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Indeed, ICDs are characterized by repetitive, reward-based behaviors (Okai et al ., 2011). A relationship between motor impulsivity scores and neural oscillations during reward and punishment feedback in healthy controls has been recently observed (Leicht et al ., 2013). The question then arises: do individuals behave impulsively as a result of a hypersensitivity to prospective reward, a hyposensitivity to prospective loss, some combination of the two, or something else entirely?…”

Section: Impulse Control Parkinson’s Disease and The Stn: Major mentioning

confidence: 86%

The Subthalamic Nucleus, Limbic Function, and Impulse Control

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been well documented that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) to address some of the disabling motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease (PD) can evoke unintended effects, especially on non-motor behavior. This observation has catalyzed more than a decade of research concentrated on establishing trends and identifying potential mechanisms for these non-motor effects. While many issues remain unresolved, the collective result of many research studies and clinical observations has been a general recognition of the role of the STN in mediating limbic function. In particular, the STN has been implicated in impulse control and the related construct of valence processing. A better understanding of STN involvement in these phenomena could have important implications for treating impulse control disorders (ICDs). ICDs affect up to 40% of PD patients on dopamine agonist therapy and approximately 15% of PD patients overall. ICDs have been reported to be associated with STN DBS. In this paper we will focus on impulse control and review pre-clinical, clinical, behavioral, imaging, and electrophysiological studies pertaining to the limbic function of the STN.

show abstract

“…First, similar to cue-locked delta, recent studies have started to document changes in feedback-locked delta (1–3 Hz) power at parietal sites during reward-outcome approximately 100–500 ms following feedback onset (Cavanagh, 2015; Foti, Weinberg, Bernat, & Proudfit, 2015; Leicht et al, 2013). Cavanagh (2015) reported that feedback-locked delta was associated with prediction error in a reinforcement-learning task.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willing to wait: Elevated reward-processing EEG activity associated with a greater preference for larger-but-delayed rewards

Pornpattananangkul

Nusslock

2016

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While almost everyone discounts the value of future rewards over immediate rewards, people differ in their so-called delay-discounting. One of the several factors that may explain individual differences in delay-discounting is reward-processing. To study individual-differences in reward-processing, however, one needs to consider the heterogeneity of neural-activity at each reward-processing stage. Here using EEG, we separated reward-related neural activity into distinct reward-anticipation and reward-outcome stages using time-frequency characteristics. Thirty-seven individuals completed a behavioral delay-discounting task. Reward-processing EEG activity was assessed using a separate reward-learning task, called a reward time-estimation task. During this task, participants were instructed to estimate time duration and were provided performance feedback on a trial-by-trial basis. Participants received monetary-reward for accurate-performance on Reward trials, but not on No-Reward trials. Reward trials, relative to No-Reward trials, enhanced EEG activity during both reward-anticipation stage (including, cued-locked delta power during cue-evaluation and pre-feedback alpha suppression during feedback-anticipation) and at the reward-outcome stage (including, feedback-locked delta, theta and beta power). Moreover, all of these EEG indices correlated with behavioral performance in the time-estimation task, suggesting their essential roles in learning and adjusting performance to maximize winnings in a reward-learning situation. Importantly, enhanced EEG power during Reward trials for 1) pre-feedback alpha suppression, 2) feedback-locked theta and 3) feedback-locked beta was associated with a greater preference for larger-but-delayed rewards. Results highlight the association between a stronger preference toward larger-but-delayed rewards and enhanced reward-processing. Moreover, our reward-processing EEG indices detail the specific stages of reward-processing where these associations occur.

show abstract

Relationship between Oscillatory Neuronal Activity during Reward Processing and Trait Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking

Cited by 43 publications

References 55 publications

Beta oscillations and reward processing: Coupling oscillatory activity and hemodynamic responses

Beta oscillations and reward processing: Coupling oscillatory activity and hemodynamic responses

The Subthalamic Nucleus, Limbic Function, and Impulse Control

Willing to wait: Elevated reward-processing EEG activity associated with a greater preference for larger-but-delayed rewards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About