Stimulus Reward Value Interacts with Training-induced Plasticity in Inhibitory Control

Abstract

Training inhibitory control, the ability to suppress motor or cognitive processes, not only enhances inhibition processes, but also reduces the perceived value and behaviors toward the stimuli associated with the inhibition goals during the practice. While these findings suggest that inhibitory control training interacts with the aversive and reward systems, the underlying spatio-temporal brain mechanisms remain unclear. We used electrical neuroimaging analyses of event-related potentials to examine the plastic brain modulations induced by training healthy participants to inhibit their responses to rewarding (pleasant chocolate) versus aversive food pictures (unpleasant vegetables) with Go/NoGo tasks. Behaviorally, the training resulted in a larger improvement in the aversive than in the rewarding NoGo stimuli condition, suggesting that reward responses impede inhibitory control learning. The electrophysiological results also revealed an interaction between reward responses and inhibitory control plasticity: we observed different effects of practice on the rewarding vs. aversive NoGo stimuli at 200 ms post-stimulus onset, when the conflicts between automatic response tendency and task demands for response inhibition are processed. Electrical source analyses revealed that this effect was driven by an increase in right orbito-cingulate and a decrease in temporo-parietal activity to the rewarding NoGo stimuli and the reverse pattern to the aversive stimuli. Our collective results provide direct neurophysiological evidence for interactions between stimulus reward value and executive control training, and suggest that changes in the assessment of stimuli with repeated motoric inhibition likely follow from associative learning and behavior-stimulus conflicts reduction mechanisms.

Proactive inhibition is not modified by deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease: An electrical neuroimaging study

“…However, to our view, this phenomenon is better explained by different brain processes, either due to different neurophysiological mechanisms, or due to different strategies. Regarding the ERPs, the NO group, for which the duration of the disease is much shorter than the other groups, and which does not have DBS implanted, shows average ERPs (Figure 3 ) very similar to what might be observed in healthy participants (Angelini et al, 2016 ; De Pretto, Hartmann, Garcia‐Burgos, Sallard, & Spierer, 2019 ). In the STN group, the ERP components are less pronounced (see Figure 4 ).…”

Targeting automatic processes to reduce unhealthy behaviours: a process framework

“…To date, several studies have shown evidence for lower evaluations of trained No-Go compared to Go and/or untrained pictures, interpreted as evidence for devaluation (Chen et al, 2016(Chen et al, , 2018aHouben et al, 2012;Quandt et al, 2019;Scholten et al, 2019;Veling et al, 2013). However, some recent studies found that the effects of Go/No-Go training were smaller for rewarding stimuli and stronger for aversive or neutral stimuli (Chen et al, 2019;De Pretto et al, 2019), which is in apparent contrast with a cue-devaluation mechanism of rewarding cues. Thus, it is so far unknown which of the specific bottom-up 'working' mechanisms (i.e., stimulus-stop contingencies or cue devaluation) are important, but both clearly refer to automatic changes and downregulation in stimulus-response associations, in line with our framework (see Figure 1).…”

Working Memory Vs Inhibitory Control: Peran terhadap Informasi Tidak Relevan sebuah Kajian Neuropsikologi

“…Di sisi lain, Inhibitory control sangat terkait dengan kontrol reaksi yang berulang ketika nilai stimulus reward semakin positif mengarahkan perilaku. Kondisi ini menyebabkan meningkatnya aktivasi jalur orbitofrontal dan cingulate namun ketika latihan kontrol inhibisi diberikan maka mengaktivasi jalur temporo -parietal (Pretto et al, 2019). Ada hal yang unik dari jalur aktivasi di otak antara working memory dan inhibitory control terhadap informasi tidak relevan.…”