Asymmetric coupling of action and outcome valence in active and observational feedback learning

Emotional cues reduce Pavlovian interference in feedback-based go and nogo learning

It is easier to execute a response in the promise of a reward and withhold a response in the promise of a punishment than vice versa, due to a conflict between cue-related Pavlovian and outcome-related instrumental action tendencies in the reverse conditions. This robust learning asymmetry in go and nogo learning is referred to as the Pavlovian bias. Interestingly, it is similar to motivational tendencies reported for affective facial expressions, i.e., facilitation of approach to a smile and withdrawal from a frown. The present study investigated whether and how learning from emotional faces instead of abstract stimuli modulates the Pavlovian bias in reinforcement learning. To this end, 137 healthy adult participants performed an orthogonalized Go/Nogo task that fully decoupled action (go/nogo) and outcome valence (win points/avoid losing points). Three groups of participants were tested with either emotional facial cues whose affective valence was either congruent (CON) or incongruent (INC) to the required instrumental response, or with neutral facial cues (NEU). Relative to NEU, the Pavlovian bias was reduced in both CON and INC, though still present under all learning conditions. Importantly, only for CON, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias effect was adaptive by improving learning performance in one of the conflict conditions. In contrast, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias in INC was completely driven by decreased learning performance in non-conflict conditions. These results suggest a potential role of arousal/salience in Pavlovian-instrumental regulation and cue-action congruency in the adaptability of goal-directed behavior. Implications for clinical application are discussed.

Direct feedback and social conformity promote behavioral change via mechanisms indexed by centroparietal positivity: Electrophysiological evidence from a role-swapping ultimatum game

Our behavior is shaped by multiple factors, including direct feedback (seeing the outcomes of our past actions) and social observation (in part, via a drive to conform to other peoples' behaviors). However, it remains unclear how these two processes are linked in the context of behavioral change. This is important to investigate, as behavioral change is associated with distinct neural correlates that reflect specific aspects of processing, such as information integration and rule updating. To clarify whether these processes characterize both direct learning and conformity, we elicited the two within the same task, using a role-swapping version of the Ultimatum Game-a fairness paradigm where subjects decide how to share a pot of money with other players-while electroencephalography (EEG) data were recorded. Behavioral results showed that subjects decided how to divide the pot based on both direct feedback (seeing whether their past proposals were accepted or rejected) and social observation (copying the splits that others just proposed). Converging EEG evidence revealed that increased centroparietal positivity (P2, P3b, and late positivity) indexed behavioral changes motivated by direct feedback and those motivated by drives to conform. However, exploratory analyses also suggest that these two motivating factors may also be dissociable, and that frontal midline theta oscillations may predict behavioral changes linked to direct feedback but not conformity. Overall, this study provides novel electrophysiological evidence regarding the different forms of behavioral change. These findings are also relevant for understanding the mechanisms of social information processing that underlie successful cooperation.

The impact of social anxiety on feedback-based go and nogo learning

The term “Pavlovian” bias describes the phenomenon that learning to execute a response to obtain a reward or to inhibit a response to avoid punishment is much easier than learning the reverse. The present study investigated the interplay between this learning bias and individual levels of social anxiety. Since avoidance behavior is a hallmark feature of social anxiety and high levels of social anxiety have been associated with better learning from negative feedback, it is conceivable that the Pavlovian bias is altered in individuals with high social anxiety, with a strong tendency to avoid negative feedback, especially (but not only) in a nogo context. In addition, learning may be modulated by the individual propensity to learn from positive or negative feedback, which can be assessed as a trait-like feature. A sample of 84 healthy university students completed an orthogonalized go/nogo task that decoupled action type (go/nogo) and outcome valence (win/avoid) and a probabilistic selection task based upon which the individual propensity to learn from positive and negative feedback was determined. Self-reported social anxiety and learning propensity were used as predictors in linear mixed-effect model analysis of performance accuracy in the go/nogo task. Results revealed that high socially anxious subjects with a propensity to learn better from negative feedback showed particularly pronounced learning for nogo to avoid while lacking significant learning for nogo to win as well as go to avoid. This result pattern suggests that high levels of social anxiety in concert with negative learning propensity hamper the overcoming of Pavlovian bias in a win context while facilitating response inhibition in an avoidance context. The present data confirm the robust Pavlovian bias in feedback-based learning and add to a growing body of evidence for modulation of feedback learning by individual factors, such as personality traits. Specifically, results show that social anxiety is associated with altered Pavlovian bias, and might suggest that this effect could be driven by altered basal ganglia function primarily affecting the nogo pathway.