The Opponent Matters: Elevated fMRI Reward Responses to Winning Against a Human Versus a Computer Opponent During Interactive Video Game Playing

Abstract

Winning against an opponent in a competitive video game can be expected to be more rewarding than losing, especially when the opponent is a fellow human player rather than a computer. We show that winning versus losing in a first-person video game activates the brain's reward circuit and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) differently depending on the type of the opponent. Participants played a competitive tank shooter game against alleged human and computer opponents while their brain activity was measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Brain responses to wins and losses were contrasted by fitting an event-related model to the hemodynamic data. Stronger activation to winning was observed in ventral and dorsal striatum as well as in vmPFC. Activation in ventral striatum was associated with participants' self-ratings of pleasure. During winning, ventral striatum showed stronger functional coupling with right insula, and weaker coupling with dorsal striatum, sensorimotor pre- and postcentral gyri, and visual association cortices. The vmPFC and dorsal striatum responses were stronger to winning when the subject was playing against a human rather than a computer. These results highlight the importance of social context in the neural encoding of reward value.

The Changing Face of Video Games and Video Gamers: Future Directions in the Scientific Study of Video Game Play and Cognitive Performance

“…In addition, many of these games contain a strong social component that may also influence cognition. For instance, it has also been demonstrated that playing social games can lead to greater stimulation of the brain's reward centers than playing solitary games (e.g., Kätsyri et al 2013), which in turn facilitates learning (Bao et al 2001; see also Granic et al 2014 for a review on the social benefits of gaming). As such, playing games that contain a social aspect may also influence cognition for reasons that are not necessarily related to the actual game mechanics.…”

How individual needs influence motivation effects: a neuroscientific study on McClelland’s need theory

“…Per cent signal change (describing the relative change of the BOLD signal to an individual baseline) was correlated with behavioural measures of needs to study if needcongruent rewards led to more activations than need-incongruent rewards. According to Kätsyri et al (2012), three anatomical ROIs were defined: NAcc, caudate nucleus and putamen. ROIs were defined using the Wake Forest University PickAtlas toolbox (Maldjian et al 2003).…”

Using knowledge from human research to improve understanding of contest theory and contest dynamics

“…In other words, the gametheoretic models that are used to create predictions can be used to create actual games, and we can have humans play them to test those predictions. Video games are a particularly useful means of exploring human contests as the interactive and immersive nature of video games elicit neural [100,101], physiological [102,103] and behavioural [104,105] responses that mirror those of real contests. Evidence suggests that repeated play improves many cognitive abilities [106,107].…”