Reward circuitry activation reflects social preferences in the face of cognitive effort.
Reward circuitry activation reflects social preferences in the face of cognitive effort.
复制标题
奖励回路的激活反映了面对认知努力时的社会偏好。
DOI：
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.06.011
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Tricomi,Elizabeth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sullivan-Toole,Holly;Dobryakova,Ekaterina;DePasque,Samantha;Tricomi,Elizabeth
在社会神经科学和认知努力的交叉点上的研究是一个有趣的新探索领域。有很大的潜力可以扩大我们对社会背景和认知努力过程的理解，目前在不同的文献中讨论了这些过程是如何相互作用的。在这篇文章中，我们简要回顾了关于认知努力的文献，重点讨论了与努力相关的评估，以及关于社会领域中认知努力的文献中的差距。接下来，我们提出了一项研究，旨在探索在不平等操纵的社会背景下，与认知努力相关的估值过程。更具体地说，我们在参与者(自己，有50美元)和两个联盟成员之间造成了金钱不平等：一个也有50美元(另一个高)，另一个只有5美元(另一个低)。然后，当参与者试图通过基于反馈的认知努力学习任务为自己和他人赚取奖金时，我们使用fMRI对他们进行扫描。无论是当参与者以自己的名义完成任务时，还是当参与者为他人赚取奖励时，正反馈在关键评估区域--腹侧纹状体(VS)和腹内侧额叶皮质(VmPFC)--产生的激活程度都明显高于负反馈。虽然VS中与奖励相关的活动对于自我而言被夸大了，而对于积极反馈和负面反馈来说，与其他HIGH相比，vmPFC中的活动在小组水平的结果中并没有区分接受者。此外，参与者自然分为两组：一组是在为自己打球时最投入的人，另一组是报告为他人参与的人。虽然自我投入的参与者在VS和vmPFC中表现出自我与其他两种情况下的差异，但其他参与的参与者在VS中只表现出对其他高水平的负面反馈的减弱反应，而在vmPFC中，接受者条件之间没有差异。总而言之，这项工作表明了个体差异的重要性，以及面对认知努力时有利的不平等厌恶的脆弱性，突显了研究社会领域认知努力的必要性。
Research at the intersection of social neuroscience and cognitive effort is an interesting new area for exploration. There is great potential to broaden our understanding of how social context and cognitive effort processes, currently addressed in disparate literatures, interact with one another. In this paper, we briefly review the literature on cognitive effort, focusing on effort-linked valuation and the gap in the literature regarding cognitive effort in the social domain. Next, we present a study designed to explore valuation processes linked to cognitive effort within the social context of an inequality manipulation. More specifically, we created monetary inequality among the participant (SELF, endowed with $50) and two confederates: one also endowed with $50 (OTHER HIGH) and another with only $5 (OTHER LOW). We then scanned participants using fMRI as they attempted to earn bonus payments for themselves and others through a cognitively effortful feedback-based learning task. Positive feedback produced significantly greater activation than negative feedback in key valuation regions, the ventral striatum (VS) and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), both when participants were performing the task on their own behalf and when earning rewards for others. While reward-related activity in the VS was exaggerated for SELF compared to OTHER HIGH for both positive and negative feedback, activity in the vmPFC did not distinguish between recipients in the group-level results. Furthermore, participants naturally fell into two groups: those most engaged when playing for themselves and those who reported engagement for others. While Self-Engaged participants showed differences between the SELF and both OTHER conditions in the VS and vmPFC, Other-Engaged participants only showed an attenuated response to negative feedback for OTHER HIGH compared to SELF in the VS and no differences between recipient conditions in the vmPFC. Together, this work shows the importance of individual differences and the fragility of advantageous inequality aversion in the face of cognitive effort, highlighting the need to study cognitive effort in the social domain.