1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Distinct neural activations correlate with maximization of reward magnitude versus frequency

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Choice selection strategies and decision-making are typically investigated using multiple-choice gambling paradigms that require participants to maximize expected value of rewards. However, research shows that performance in such paradigms suffers from individual biases towards the frequency of gains such that users often choose smaller frequent gains over larger rarely occurring gains, also referred to as melioration. To understand the basis of this subjective tradeoff, we used a simple 2-choice reward task paradigm in 186 healthy human adult subjects sampled across the adult lifespan. Cortical source reconstruction of simultaneously recorded electroencephalography suggested distinct neural correlates for maximizing reward magnitude versus frequency. We found that activations in the parahippocampal and entorhinal areas, which are typically linked to memory function, specifically correlated with maximization of reward magnitude. In contrast, maximization of reward frequency was correlated with activations in the lateral orbitofrontal cortices and operculum, typical areas involved in reward processing. These findings reveal distinct neural processes serving reward frequency versus magnitude maximization that can have clinical translational utility to optimize decision-making.

          Related collections

          Most cited references125

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The PHQ-9

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest.

              In this study, we have assessed the validity and reliability of an automated labeling system that we have developed for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on magnetic resonance images into gyral based regions of interest (ROIs). Using a dataset of 40 MRI scans we manually identified 34 cortical ROIs in each of the individual hemispheres. This information was then encoded in the form of an atlas that was utilized to automatically label ROIs. To examine the validity, as well as the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the automated system, we used both intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and a new method known as mean distance maps, to assess the degree of mismatch between the manual and the automated sets of ROIs. When compared with the manual ROIs, the automated ROIs were highly accurate, with an average ICC of 0.835 across all of the ROIs, and a mean distance error of less than 1 mm. Intra- and inter-rater comparisons yielded little to no difference between the sets of ROIs. These findings suggest that the automated method we have developed for subdividing the human cerebral cortex into standard gyral-based neuroanatomical regions is both anatomically valid and reliable. This method may be useful for both morphometric and functional studies of the cerebral cortex as well as for clinical investigations aimed at tracking the evolution of disease-induced changes over time, including clinical trials in which MRI-based measures are used to examine response to treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Cerebral Cortex
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1047-3211
                1460-2199
                May 15 2023
                May 09 2023
                December 26 2022
                May 15 2023
                May 09 2023
                December 26 2022
                : 33
                : 10
                : 6038-6050
                Article
                10.1093/cercor/bhac482
                10422923
                36573422
                ba6a0c37-6562-4248-a633-d04c05451d12
                © 2022

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article