Avoidance-based human Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in individuals with chronic pain

Avoidance of pain has been argued to be key factor leading pain events to chronic disability. In this respect, research has focused on investigating the working mechanisms of avoidance's acquisition. Avoidance of painful stimuli has been traditionally studied using a combination of Pavlovian and Instrumental procedures. However, such approach seems to go against real-life scenarios where avoidance is commonly acquired more readily. Using a novel pain avoidance paradigm, we tested whether pain avoidance can be installed in absence of associations between a cue and pain omission, and whether such avoidance differs between pain patients and healthy controls. Participants first learned to avoid painful stimuli by pressing a grip bar. Then, they passively encountered pairings of one geometrical shape with pain and of another geometrical shape without pain. Lastly, participants encountered the geometrical shapes while being able to use the grip bar. Results showed that participants pressed the bar more vigorously when encountering the previously pain-related shape compared to the pain-unrelated shape. This effect did not seem to differ between pain patients and healthy control. Our study could inspire a new way in measuring avoidance in pain, possibly paving the way to better understanding how avoidance is installed in chronic pain.

Modifying Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer by approach avoidance training in healthy subjects: a proof of concept study

The modulation of instrumental action by conditioned Pavlovian cues is hypothesized to play a role in the emergence and maintenance of maladaptive behavior. The Pavlovian to Instrumental transfer task (PIT) is designed to examine the magnitude of the influence of cues on behavior and we aim to manipulate the motivational value of Pavlovian cues to reduce their effect on instrumental responding. To this end, we utilized a joystick-based modification of approach and avoidance propensities that has shown success in clinical populations. To examine changes in PIT, we subjected 35 healthy participants to a series of experimental procedures: (1) Instrumental training was followed by (2) Pavlovian conditioning of neutral stimuli that were associated with monetary reward or loss. (3) In a subsequent joystick task, approach and avoidance tendencies toward conditioned cues were assessed. (4) In a transfer test, the PIT effect as the impact of conditioned cues on instrumental behavior was measured. (5) The explicit knowledge of cue-reward contingencies was assessed in a forced-choice phase. (6, 7) systematic joystick training was followed by a posttest (8) the transfer task and forced-choice test were repeated. We found no effect of training on approach-avoidance propensities in the context of this proof of concept study. A higher response rate towards negative stimuli during PIT after systematic training compared to sham training was seen. On the other hand, we saw an increased PIT effect after sham training. These results contribute to the understanding of the strength of the influence of cues on instrumental behavior. Our findings further stress the importance of context, instructions and operationalization of instrumental behavior in the framework of transfer effects.

The value of an action: Impact of motor behaviour on outcome processing and stimulus preference

While influences of Pavlovian associations on instrumental behaviour are well established, we still do not know how motor actions affect the formation of Pavlovian associations. To address this question, we designed a task in which participants were presented with neutral stimuli, half of which were paired with an active response, half with a passive waiting period. Stimuli had an 80% chance of predicting either a monetary gain or loss. We compared the feedback-related negativity (FRN) in response to predictive stimuli and outcomes, as well as directed phase synchronization before and after outcome presentation between trials with versus without a motor response. We found a larger FRN amplitude in response to outcomes presented after a motor response (active trials). This effect was driven by a positive deflection in active reward trials, which was absent in passive reward trials. Connectivity analysis revealed that the motor action reversed the direction of the phase synchronization at the time of the feedback presentation: Top-down information flow during the outcome anticipation phase in active trials, but bottom-up information flow in passive trials. This main effect of action was mirrored in behavioural data showing that participants preferred stimuli associated with an active response. Our findings suggest an influence of neural systems that initiate motor actions on neural systems involved in reward processing. We suggest that motor actions might modulate the brain responses to feedback by affecting the dynamics of brain activity towards optimizing the processing of the resulting action outcome.

Amygdala-cortical collaboration in reward learning and decision making

Adaptive reward-related decision making requires accurate prospective consideration of the specific outcome of each option and its current desirability. These mental simulations are informed by stored memories of the associative relationships that exist within an environment. In this review, I discuss recent investigations of the function of circuitry between the basolateral amygdala (BLA) and lateral (lOFC) and medial (mOFC) orbitofrontal cortex in the learning and use of associative reward memories. I draw conclusions from data collected using sophisticated behavioral approaches to diagnose the content of appetitive memory in combination with modern circuit dissection tools. I propose that, via their direct bidirectional connections, the BLA and OFC collaborate to help us encode detailed, outcome-specific, state-dependent reward memories and to use those memories to enable the predictions and inferences that support adaptive decision making. Whereas lOFC→BLA projections mediate the encoding of outcome-specific reward memories, mOFC→BLA projections regulate the ability to use these memories to inform reward pursuit decisions. BLA projections to lOFC and mOFC both contribute to using reward memories to guide decision making. The BLA→lOFC pathway mediates the ability to represent the identity of a specific predicted reward and the BLA→mOFC pathway facilitates understanding of the value of predicted events. Thus, I outline a neuronal circuit architecture for reward learning and decision making and provide new testable hypotheses as well as implications for both adaptive and maladaptive decision making.

General Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in humans: Evidence from Bayesian inference

When repeatedly paired with rewarding outcomes (i.e., Pavlovian conditioning), environmental cues may acquire predictive and motivational significance and later enhance instrumental responding for the same (i.e., outcome-specific transfer) or motivationally similar (i.e., general transfer) outcomes. Although outcome-specific and general Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer (PIT) are characterized by different neural substrates and behavioral mechanisms, general transfer has never been studied in isolation from outcome-specific transfer in humans. The first aim of the present study was to test whether the general transfer effect could emerge in isolation and independently of outcome-specific transfer. Our results showed that general transfer can be elicited without the concurrent presence of outcome-specific transfer, supporting the idea that outcome-specific and general transfer can be studied independently of each other. The second aim of the present study was to clarify whether the affordance-like properties of the outcomes can affect the general transfer. In fact, a critical difference in current studies on general transfer concerns the use of cues associated with outcomes for which an action was previously learned (or not) during the instrumental training. This apparently minor difference affects the affordance-like properties of the outcome and may also be transferred to the cue, in turn impacting general transfer. Results revealed a general transfer of the same magnitude regardless of whether cues were associated with reward earned or not during instrumental conditioning. These findings increase the current knowledge on the incentive motivational mechanism behind general transfer, indicating that it is independent of the motor features of the outcome.

Measuring maladaptive avoidance: from animal models to clinical anxiety

Avoiding stimuli that predict danger is required for survival. However, avoidance can become maladaptive in individuals who overestimate threat and thus avoid safe situations as well as dangerous ones. Excessive avoidance is a core feature of anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). This avoidance prevents patients from confronting maladaptive threat beliefs, thereby maintaining disordered anxiety. Avoidance is associated with high levels of psychosocial impairment yet is poorly understood at a mechanistic level. Many objective laboratory assessments of avoidance measure adaptive avoidance, in which an individual learns to successfully avoid a truly noxious stimulus. However, anxiety disorders are characterized by maladaptive avoidance, for which there are fewer objective laboratory measures. We posit that maladaptive avoidance behavior depends on a combination of three altered neurobehavioral processes: (1) threat appraisal, (2) habitual avoidance, and (3) trait avoidance tendency. This heterogeneity in underlying processes presents challenges to the objective measurement of maladaptive avoidance behavior. Here we first review existing paradigms for measuring avoidance behavior and its underlying neural mechanisms in both human and animal models, and identify how existing paradigms relate to these neurobehavioral processes. We then propose a new framework to improve the translational understanding of maladaptive avoidance behavior by adapting paradigms to better differentiate underlying processes and mechanisms and applying these paradigms in clinical populations across diagnoses with the goal of developing novel interventions to engage specific identified neurobehavioral targets.

Alcohol approach bias is associated with both behavioral and neural Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer effects in alcohol-dependent patients

Background

Even after qualified detoxification, alcohol-dependent (AD) patients may relapse to drinking alcohol despite their decision to abstain. Two mechanisms may play important roles. First, the impact of environmental cues on instrumental behavior (i.e., Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer [PIT] effect), which was found to be stronger in prospectively relapsing AD patients than in abstaining patients. Second, an automatic approach bias toward alcohol stimuli was observed in AD patients, and interventions targeting this bias reduced the relapse risk in some studies. Previous findings suggest a potential behavioral and neurobiological overlap between these two mechanisms.

Methods

In this study, we examined the association between alcohol approach bias and both behavioral and neural non-drug-related PIT effects in AD patients after detoxification. A total of 100 AD patients (17 females) performed a PIT task and an alcohol approach/avoidance task. Patients were followed for 6 months.

Results

A stronger alcohol approach bias was associated with both a more pronounced behavioral PIT effect and stronger PIT-related neural activity in the right nucleus accumbens. Moreover, the association between alcohol approach bias and behavioral PIT increased with the severity of alcohol dependence and trait impulsivity and was stronger in patients who relapsed during follow-up in the exploratory analysis.

Conclusions

These findings indicate partial behavioral and neurobiological overlap between alcohol approach bias and the PIT effect assessed with our tasks. The association was stronger in patients with more severe alcohol dependence.

Aversive motivation and cognitive control

Aversive motivation plays a prominent role in driving individuals to exert cognitive control. However, the complexity of behavioral responses attributed to aversive incentives creates significant challenges for developing a clear understanding of the neural mechanisms of this motivation-control interaction. We review the animal learning, systems neuroscience, and computational literatures to highlight the importance of experimental paradigms that incorporate both motivational context manipulations and mixed motivational components (e.g., bundling of appetitive and aversive incentives). Specifically, we postulate that to understand aversive incentive effects on cognitive control allocation, a critical contextual factor is whether such incentives are associated with negative reinforcement or punishment. We further illustrate how the inclusion of mixed motivational components in experimental paradigms enables increased precision in the measurement of aversive influences on cognitive control. A sharpened experimental and theoretical focus regarding the manipulation and assessment of distinct motivational dimensions promises to advance understanding of the neural, monoaminergic, and computational mechanisms that underlie the interaction of motivation and cognitive control.

Effective Connectivity during an Avoidance-Based Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer Task

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) refers to a phenomenon whereby a classically conditioned stimulus (CS) impacts the motivational salience of instrumental behavior. We examined behavioral response patterns and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) based effective connectivity during an avoidance-based PIT task. Eleven participants (8 females; Mage = 28.2, SD = 2.8, range = 25-32 years) completed the task. Effective connectivity between a priori brain regions engaged during the task was determined using hemodynamic response function group iterative multiple model estimation (HRF-GIMME). Participants exhibited behavior that was suggestive of specific PIT, a CS previously associated with a reinforcing outcome increased instrumental responding directed at the same outcome. We did not find evidence for general PIT; a CS did not significantly increase instrumental responding towards a different but related outcome. Using HRF-GIMME, we recovered effective connectivity maps among corticostriatal circuits engaged during the task. Group-level paths revealed directional effects from left putamen to right insula and from right putamen to right cingulate. Importantly, a direct effect of specific PIT stimuli on blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) activity in the left putamen was found. Results provide initial evidence of effective connectivity in key brain regions in an avoidance-based PIT task network. This study adds to the literature studying PIT effects in humans and employing GIMME models to understand how psychological phenomena are supported in the brain.

Susceptibility to interference between Pavlovian and instrumental control is associated with early hazardous alcohol use

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) tasks examine the influence of Pavlovian stimuli on ongoing instrumental behaviour. Previous studies reported associations between a strong PIT effect, high-risk drinking and alcohol use disorder. This study investigated whether susceptibility to interference between Pavlovian and instrumental control is linked to risky alcohol use in a community sample of 18-year-old male adults. Participants (N = 191) were instructed to 'collect good shells' and 'leave bad shells' during the presentation of appetitive (monetary reward), aversive (monetary loss) or neutral Pavlovian stimuli. We compared instrumental error rates (ER) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain responses between the congruent and incongruent conditions, as well as among high-risk and low-risk drinking groups. On average, individuals showed a substantial PIT effect, that is, increased ER when Pavlovian cues and instrumental stimuli were in conflict compared with congruent trials. Neural PIT correlates were found in the ventral striatum and the dorsomedial and lateral prefrontal cortices (lPFC). Importantly, high-risk drinking was associated with a stronger behavioural PIT effect, a decreased lPFC response and an increased neural response in the ventral striatum on the trend level. Moreover, high-risk drinkers showed weaker connectivity from the ventral striatum to the lPFC during incongruent trials. Our study links interference during PIT to drinking behaviour in healthy, young adults. High-risk drinkers showed higher susceptibility to Pavlovian cues, especially when they conflicted with instrumental behaviour, indicating lower interference control abilities. Increased activity in the ventral striatum (bottom-up), decreased lPFC response (top-down), and their altered interplay may contribute to poor interference control in the high-risk drinkers.

The lesser evil: Pavlovian-instrumental transfer & aversive motivation

While our understanding of appetitive motivation includes accounts of rich cognitive phenomena, such as choice, sensory-specificity and outcome valuation, the same is not true in aversive processes. A highly sophisticated picture has emerged of Pavlovian fear conditioning and extinction, but progress in aversive motivation has been somewhat limited to these fundamental behaviors. Many differences between appetitive and aversive stimuli permit different kinds of analyses; a widely used procedure in appetitive studies that can expand the scope of aversive motivation is Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT). Recently, this motivational transfer effect has been used to examine issues pertaining to sensory-specificity and the nature of defensive control in avoidance learning. Given enduring controversies and unresolved criticisms surrounding avoidance research, PIT offers a valuable, well-controlled procedure with which to similarly probe this form of motivation. Furthermore, while avoidance itself can be criticized as artificial, PIT can be an effective model for how skills learned through avoidance can be practically applied to encounters with threatening or fearful stimuli and stress. Despite sensory-related challenges presented by the limited aversive unconditioned stimuli typically used in research, transfer testing can nevertheless provide valuable information on the psychological nature of this historically controversial phenomenon.

Neural responses to negative events and subsequent persistence behavior differ in individuals recovering from opioid use disorder compared to controls

Background: Negative emotion is associated with substance craving and use in individuals recovering from substance use disorders, including prescription opioid use disorder (POUD). Decisions to abandon or persist towards a goal after negative emotion-eliciting events, and neural responses that shape such decisions, may be important in maintaining recovery from POUD.Objectives: We examined differences in neural responses to negative events and subsequent persistence decisions in individuals recovering from POUD without a history of a substance use disorder. Methods: 20 individuals with POUD (POUD group: 4 females, abstinent 2-3 weeks after admission to an inpatient treatment facility post-detoxification, no other substance use disorder), and 20 individuals with no substance use history (control group: 6 females) completed a persistence-after-setbacks task during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Participants advanced along a path toward a reward; after encountering each negative event (i.e., progress-erasing setback), participants made decisions to persist or abandon the path. Persistence decision rates were compared between groups and blood-oxygen-level-dependent signal to negative events was analyzed within a striatum region of interest (ROI) as well as whole-brain.Results: The POUD group persisted less (t(38) = 2.293, p = .028, d = .725) and showed lower striatum (left ventral putamen) signal to negative events compared to the control group (p < .05, corrected for striatum ROI).Conclusions: In POUD, neural and behavioral responses to negative events differ from controls. These differences are a target for research to address whether POUD treatment increases persistence and striatum responses to negative events and improves recovery outcomes.

Instrumental and Pavlovian Mechanisms in Alcohol Use Disorder

Purpose of Review

Current theories of alcohol use disorders (AUD) highlight the importance of Pavlovian and instrumental learning processes mainly based on preclinical animal studies. Here, we summarize available evidence for alterations of those processes in human participants with AUD with a focus on habitual versus goal-directed instrumental learning, Pavlovian conditioning, and Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) paradigms.

Recent Findings

The balance between habitual and goal-directed control in AUD participants has been studied using outcome devaluation or sequential decision-making procedures, which have found some evidence of reduced goal-directed/model-based control, but little evidence for stronger habitual responding. The employed Pavlovian learning and PIT paradigms have shown considerable differences regarding experimental procedures, e.g., alcohol-related or conventional reinforcers or stimuli.

Summary

While studies of basic learning processes in human participants with AUD support a role of Pavlovian and instrumental learning mechanisms in the development and maintenance of drug addiction, current studies are characterized by large variability regarding methodology, sample characteristics, and results, and translation from animal paradigms to human research remains challenging. Longitudinal approaches with reliable and ecologically valid paradigms of Pavlovian and instrumental processes, including alcohol-related cues and outcomes, are warranted and should be combined with state-of-the-art imaging techniques, computational approaches, and ecological momentary assessment methods.

The Protective Effects of Perceived Control During Repeated Exposure to Aversive Stimuli

The ability to perceive and exercise control is a major contributor to our mental and physical wellbeing. When faced with uncontrollable aversive stimuli, organisms develop heightened anxiety and become unwilling to exert effort to avoid the stimuli. In contrast, when faced with controllable aversive stimuli, organisms demonstrate behavioral vigor via avoidance attempts toward trying to seek and exercise control over the environment. As such, controllability confers protective effects against reduced avoidance motivation trigged by aversive environments. These observations beg the question of whether controllability can be potent enough to reverse passivity following repeated exposure to uncontrollable aversive stimuli and how this protective effect is encoded neurally. Human participants performed a Control in Aversive Domain (CAD) task where they were first subjected to a series of repeated uncontrollable aversive stimuli (i.e., aversive tones) across several contexts that were followed by a series of controllable aversive stimuli in a novel context. Faced with persistent uncontrollability, participants significantly reduced their avoidance attempts over time and biased toward giving up. However, the subsequent presence of controllability rescued participants' avoidance behavior. Strikingly, participants who responded more strongly to the protective effects of control also had greater ventromedial prefrontal cortical (vmPFC) activation-a region previously observed to be associated with encoding the subjective value of control. Taken together, these findings highlighted the protective effect conferred by perceived control against passivity and offered insights into the potential role of the vmPFC in controllable environments, with implications for understanding the beneficial influence of perceived control on adaptive behavior.

Modulation of cue-guided choices by transcranial direct current stimulation

Environmental cues may anticipate the availability of rewards, thus acting as a guide towards a specific choice (i.e., cue-guided choices). Despite the lateral prefrontal cortex having a critical role in using past learning and flexibly selecting relevant information to guide behavior, the literature on the neural basis of human cue-guided choice mainly focused on the subcortical brain structures implicated, while the specific role of cortical areas remained unclear. The present study aimed to provide causal evidence for the involvement of the lateral prefrontal cortex in two forms of human cue-guided choice, namely outcome-specific and general. To do this, 2 mA cathodal, anodal or sham transcranial direct current stimulation was applied over the lateral prefrontal cortex (with the posterior parietal cortex serving as control region) in three separate groups performing a Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer task. Results showed, for the first time, a dissociation in the cortical structures involved in human cue-guided choice. Cathodal stimulation of the lateral prefrontal cortex reduced the outcome-specific transfer. In striking contrast, there was no influence on the general transfer. These results argue in favor of the presence of at least two possible neural pathways underlying cue-guided choices.

Forced choices reveal a trade-off between cognitive effort and physical pain

Cognitive effort is described as aversive, and people will generally avoid it when possible. This aversion to effort is believed to arise from a cost-benefit analysis of the actions available. The comparison of cognitive effort against other primary aversive experiences, however, remains relatively unexplored. Here, we offered participants choices between performing a cognitively demanding task or experiencing thermal pain. We found that cognitive effort can be traded off for physical pain and that people generally avoid exerting high levels of cognitive effort. We also used computational modelling to examine the aversive subjective value of effort and its effects on response behaviours. Applying this model to decision times revealed asymmetric effects of effort and pain, suggesting that cognitive effort may not share the same basic influences on avoidance behaviour as more primary aversive stimuli such as physical pain.

Motivational factors underlying aversive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer

While interest in active avoidance has recently been resurgent, many concerns relating to the nature of this form of learning remain unresolved. By separating stimulus and response acquisition, aversive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer can be used to measure the effect of avoidance learning on threat processing with more control than typical avoidance procedures. However, the motivational substrates that contribute to the aversive transfer effect have not been thoroughly examined. In three studies using rodents, the impact of a variety of aversive signals on shock-avoidance responding (i.e., two-way shuttling) was evaluated. Fox urine, as well as a tone paired with the delivery of the predator odor were insufficient modulatory stimuli for the avoidance response. Similarly, a signal for the absence of food did not generate appropriate aversive motivation to enhance shuttling. Only conditioned Pavlovian stimuli that had been paired with unconditioned threats were capable of augmenting shock-avoidance responding. This was true whether the signaled outcome was the same (e.g., shock) or different (e.g., klaxon) from the avoidance outcome (i.e., shock). These findings help to characterize the aversive transfer effect and provide a more thorough analysis of its generalization to warning signals for different kinds of threats. This feature of aversive motivation has not been demonstrated using conventional avoidance procedures and could be potentially useful for applying avoidance in treatment settings.

Subliminal determinants of cue-guided choice

By anticipating potential rewards, external cues can guide behavior to achieve a goal. Whether the conscious elaboration of these cues is necessary to elicit cue-guided choices is still unknown. The goal of the present study is to test whether the subliminal presentation of a visual cue previously paired with a reward is sufficient to bias responses that can lead to the same or a similar reward. To this aim, three experiments compared the subliminal and supraliminal presentation of reward-associated cues during a Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer task. In line with previous evidence, results showed that the supraliminal presentation of reward-associated Pavlovian cues biased participant’s choice towards motivationally similar rewards (general transfer) as well as towards rewards sharing the precise sensory-specific properties of the cue (outcome-specific transfer). In striking contrast, subliminal cues biased choice only towards motivationally similar rewards (general transfer). Taken together, these findings suggest that cue-guided choices are modulated by the level of perceptual threshold (i.e., subliminal vs supraliminal) of reward-associated cues. Although conscious elaboration of the cue is necessary to guide choice towards a specific reward, subliminal processing is still sufficient to push towards choices sharing the motivational properties of the cue. Implications for everyday life, clinical conditions, and theoretical accounts of cue-guided choices are discussed.

Behavioral Conceptualization and Treatment of Chronic Pain

Pain is considered a hardwired signal of bodily disturbance belonging to a basic motivational system that urges the individual to act and to restore the body's integrity, rather than just a sensory and emotional experience. Given its eminent survival value, pain is a strong motivator for learning. Response to repeated pain increases when harm risks are high (sensitization) and decreases in the absence of such risks (habituation). Discovering relations between pain and other events provides the possibility to predict (Pavlovian conditioning) and control (operant conditioning) harmful events. Avoidance is adaptive in the short term but paradoxically may have detrimental long-term effects. Pain and pain-related responses compete with other demands in the environment. Exposure-based treatments share the aim of facilitating or restoring the pursuit of individual valued life goals in the face of persistent pain, and further improvements in pain treatment may require a paradigm shift toward more personalized approaches.

Intact corticostriatal control of goal-directed action in Alcohol Use Disorder: a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer and outcome-devaluation study

Deficits in instrumental, goal-directed control, combined with the influence of drug-associated Pavlovian-conditioned stimuli, are thought to influence the development and maintenance of addiction. However, direct evidence has mainly come from animal studies. We sought to establish whether alcohol use disorder (AUD) is characterized by behavioral or neurobiological deficits in (i) the integration of Pavlovian and instrumental values and (ii) goal-directed control; and (iii) whether duration or severity of AUD is associated with such deficits. The influence of cues predicting food rewards on instrumental action was assessed in a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) test, measuring both specific and general PIT, and goal-directed behavior in an outcome-devaluation test. Brain activity was measured using functional MRI in 38 abstinent individuals with AUD and 22 matched healthy control individuals (HCs). We found significant specific and general PIT and outcome-devaluation effects across groups indicating goal-directed control, mediated by distinct corticostriatal signals, but no significant differences between individuals with AUD and healthy controls. Bayesian analyses provided substantial-to-strong evidence for the absence of group differences for these effects, or any relationship with duration or severity of AUD. These results suggest intact ability to integrate action-outcome associations on specific and general PIT and goal-directed learning in AUD during abstinence.

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer after human threat conditioning

Threat conditioning is a common associative learning model with translational relevance. How threat-conditioned cues impact on formally unrelated instrumental behavior in humans is not well known. Such an effect is known as Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT). While PIT with aversive primary Pavlovian reinforcers is established in nonhuman animals, this is less clear in humans, where secondary reinforcers or instructed instrumental responses are most often investigated. We modified an existing human PIT procedure to include primary reinforcers. Participants first learned to obtain (or avoid losing) appetitive instrumental reinforcement (chocolate) by appropriate approach or avoidance actions. They either had to act (Go) or to withhold an action (NoGo), and in the Go condition either to approach a reward target to collect it or to withdraw from the reward target to avoid losing it. Then they learned to associate screen color (CS) with aversive Pavlovian reinforcement (electric shock US). In the transfer phase, we conducted the instrumental task during the presence of Pavlovian CS. In a first experiment, we show that the aversive Pavlovian CS+, compared to CS−, increased response rate in Go-Withdraw trials, i.e., induce conditioned facilitation of avoidance responses. This finding was confirmed in a second and independent experiment with an increased number of Go-Withdraw trials. Notably, we observed no appreciable conditioned suppression of approach responses. Effect size to distinguish CS+/CS− in Go-Withdraw trials was d = 0.42 in the confirmation sample. This would require n = 37 participants to demonstrate threat learning with 80% power. Thus, the effect size is on a practically useful scale although smaller than for model-based analysis of autonomic measures. In summary, our results indicate conditioned facilitation of formally unrelated instrumental avoidance behavior in humans and provide a novel behavioral threat learning measure that requires only key presses.

Neural correlates of instrumental responding in the context of alcohol-related cues index disorder severity and relapse risk

The influence of Pavlovian conditioned stimuli on ongoing behavior may contribute to explaining how alcohol cues stimulate drug seeking and intake. Using a Pavlovian-instrumental transfer task, we investigated the effects of alcohol-related cues on approach behavior (i.e., instrumental response behavior) and its neural correlates, and related both to the relapse after detoxification in alcohol-dependent patients. Thirty-one recently detoxified alcohol-dependent patients and 24 healthy controls underwent instrumental training, where approach or non-approach towards initially neutral stimuli was reinforced by monetary incentives. Approach behavior was tested during extinction with either alcohol-related or neutral stimuli (as Pavlovian cues) presented in the background during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Patients were subsequently followed up for 6 months. We observed that alcohol-related background stimuli inhibited the approach behavior in detoxified alcohol-dependent patients (t = - 3.86, p < .001), but not in healthy controls (t = - 0.92, p = .36). This behavioral inhibition was associated with neural activation in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) (t₍₃₀₎ = 2.06, p < .05). Interestingly, both the effects were only present in subsequent abstainers, but not relapsers and in those with mild but not severe dependence. Our data show that alcohol-related cues can acquire inhibitory behavioral features typical of aversive stimuli despite being accompanied by a stronger NAcc activation, suggesting salience attribution. The fact that these findings are restricted to abstinence and milder illness suggests that they may be potential resilience factors.Clinical trial: LeAD study, http://www.lead-studie.de , NCT01679145.

Inhibited Personality Temperaments Translated Through Enhanced Avoidance and Associative Learning Increase Vulnerability for PTSD

Although many individuals who experience a trauma go on to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the rate of PTSD following trauma is only about 15-24%. There must be some pre-existing conditions that impart increased vulnerability to some individuals and not others. Diathesis models of PTSD theorize that pre-existing vulnerabilities interact with traumatic experiences to produce psychopathology. Recent work has indicated that personality factors such as behavioral inhibition (BI), harm avoidance (HA), and distressed (Type D) personality are vulnerability factors for the development of PTSD and anxiety disorders. These personality temperaments produce enhanced acquisition or maintenance of associations, especially avoidance, which is a criterion symptom of PTSD. In this review, we highlight the evidence for a relationship between these personality types and enhanced avoidance and associative learning, which may increase risk for the development of PTSD. First, we provide the evidence confirming a relationship among BI, HA, distressed (Type D) personality, and PTSD. Second, we present recent findings that BI is associated with enhanced avoidance learning in both humans and animal models. Third, we will review evidence that BI is also associated with enhanced eyeblink conditioning in both humans and animal models. Overall, data from both humans and animals suggest that these personality traits promote enhanced avoidance and associative learning, as well as slowing of extinction in some training protocols, which all support the learning diathesis model. These findings of enhanced learning in vulnerable individuals can be used to develop objective behavioral measures to pre-identify individuals who are more at risk for development of PTSD following traumatic events, allowing for early (possibly preventative) intervention, as well as suggesting possible therapies for PTSD targeted on remediating avoidance or associative learning. Future work should explore the neural substrates of enhanced avoidance and associative learning for behaviorally inhibited individuals in both the animal model and human participants.

Social threat learning transfers to decision making in humans

In today’s world, indirect exposure to threatening situations is more common than ever, as illustrated by footage of terror and disaster in social media. How do such social threat learning experiences shape our decisions? We found that learning about threats from both observation and verbal information strongly influenced decision making. As with learning from our own experience, this influence could be either adaptive or maladaptive depending on whether the social information provided accurate expectations about the environment. Our findings can help explain both adaptive and pathological behaviors resulting from the indirect exposure to threatening events.

In today’s world, mass-media and online social networks present us with unprecedented exposure to second-hand, vicarious experiences and thereby the chance of forming associations between previously innocuous events (e.g., being in a subway station) and aversive outcomes (e.g., footage or verbal reports from a violent terrorist attack) without direct experience. Such social threat, or fear, learning can have dramatic consequences, as manifested in acute stress symptoms and maladaptive fears. However, most research has so far focused on socially acquired threat responses that are expressed as increased arousal rather than active behavior. In three experiments (n = 120), we examined the effect of indirect experiences on behaviors by establishing a link between social threat learning and instrumental decision making. We contrasted learning from direct experience (i.e., Pavlovian conditioning) (experiment 1) against two common forms of social threat learning—social observation (experiment 2) and verbal instruction (experiment 3)—and how this learning transferred to subsequent instrumental decision making using behavioral experiments and computational modeling. We found that both types of social threat learning transfer to decision making in a strong and surprisingly inflexible manner. Notably, computational modeling indicated that the transfer of observational and instructed threat learning involved different computational mechanisms. Our results demonstrate the strong influence of others’ expressions of fear on one’s own decisions and have important implications for understanding both healthy and pathological human behaviors resulting from the indirect exposure to threatening events.

Reward and avoidance learning in the context of aversive environments and possible implications for depressive symptoms

BACKGROUND

Aversive stimuli in the environment influence human actions. This includes valence-dependent influences on action selection, e.g., increased avoidance but decreased approach behavior. However, it is yet unclear how aversive stimuli interact with complex learning and decision-making in the reward and avoidance domain. Moreover, the underlying computational mechanisms of these decision-making biases are unknown.

METHODS

To elucidate these mechanisms, 54 healthy young male subjects performed a two-step sequential decision-making task, which allows to computationally model different aspects of learning, e.g., model-free, habitual, and model-based, goal-directed learning. We used a within-subject design, crossing task valence (reward vs. punishment learning) with emotional context (aversive vs. neutral background stimuli). We analyzed choice data, applied a computational model, and performed simulations.

RESULTS

Whereas model-based learning was not affected, aversive stimuli interacted with model-free learning in a way that depended on task valence. Thus, aversive stimuli increased model-free avoidance learning but decreased model-free reward learning. The computational model confirmed this effect: the parameter lambda that indicates the influence of reward prediction errors on decision values was increased in the punishment condition but decreased in the reward condition when aversive stimuli were present. Further, by using the inferred computational parameters to simulate choice data, our effects were captured. Exploratory analyses revealed that the observed biases were associated with subclinical depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that aversive environmental stimuli affect complex learning and decision-making, which depends on task valence. Further, we provide a model of the underlying computations of this affective modulation. Finally, our finding of increased decision-making biases in subjects reporting subclinical depressive symptoms matches recent reports of amplified Pavlovian influences on action selection in depression and suggests a potential vulnerability factor for mood disorders. We discuss our findings in the light of the involvement of the neuromodulators serotonin and dopamine.

Motivational sensitivity of outcome-response priming: Experimental research and theoretical models

Outcome-response (O-R) priming is at the core of various associative theories of human intentional action. This is a simple and parsimonious mechanism by which activation of outcome representations (e.g. thinking about the light coming on) leads to activation of the associated motor patterns required to achieve it (e.g. pushing the light switch). In the current manuscript, we review the evidence for such O-R associative links demonstrated by converging (yet until now, separate) strands of research. While there is a wealth of evidence that both the perceptual and motivational properties of an outcome can be encoded in the O-R association and mediate O-R priming, we critically examine the integration of these mechanisms and the conditions under which motivational factors constrain the sensory O-R priming effect. We discuss the clinical relevance of this O-R priming mechanism, whether it can satisfactorily account for human goal-directed behaviour, and the implications for theories of human action control.

Avoidance Problems Reconsidered

Active avoidance is the prototypical paradigm for studying aversively-motivated instrumental behavior. However, avoidance research stalled amid heated theoretical debates and the hypothesis that active avoidance is essentially Pavlovian flight. Here I reconsider key "avoidance problems" and review neurobehavioral data collected with modern tools. Although the picture remains incomplete, these studies strongly suggest that avoidance has an instrumental component and is mediated by brain circuits that resemble appetitive instrumental actions more than Pavlovian fear reactions. Rapid progress may be possible if investigators consider important factors like safety signals, response-competition, goal-directed vs. habitual control and threat imminence in avoidance study design. Since avoidance responses likely contribute to active coping, this research has important implications for understanding human resilience and disorders of control.

Associative mechanisms involved in specific Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in human learning tasks

Four experiments compared the effect of forward and backward conditioning procedures on the ability of conditioned stimuli (CS) to elevate instrumental responding in a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) task. Two responses were each trained with one distinct outcome (R1->O1, R2->O2), either concurrently (Experiment 1) or separately (Experiments 2, 3 and 4). Then, in Experiments 1 and 2, four CSs were either followed or preceded by one outcome (A->O1, B->O2, O1->C, O2->D). In Experiment 3, each CS was preceded and followed by an outcome: for one group of participants, both outcomes were identical (e.g., O1->A->O1, O2->B->O2), but for the other, they were different (e.g., O1->A->O2, O2->B->O1). In Experiment 4, two CSs were preceded and followed by identical outcomes, and two CSs by different outcomes. In the PIT tests, participants performed R1 and R2 in the presence and absence of the CSs. In Experiments 1 and 2, only the CSs followed by outcomes in Pavlovian training elevated responding. In Experiments 3 and 4, all the CSs elevated responding but based on the outcome that followed them in training. These results support the stimulus-outcome-response (S-O-R) mechanism of specific PIT, according to which CSs elevate responding via activation of its associated outcome representation.

Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer of Nicotine and Food Cues in Deprived Cigarette Smokers

Introduction

Smoking-related cues can promote drug-seeking behavior and curtail attempts to quit. One way to understand the potential impact of such cues is to compare cue-elicited behaviors for smoking and other reinforcers (eg, food) using the Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer paradigm, which measures how much control cues can exert over reward-seeking responses.

Methods

We tested the influence of appetitive cues on smokers' behavior following 12 hours of abstinence from smoking and eating. First, we equated the value of cigarette and food by assessing a Willingness-to-Pay measure for each reinforcer. Second, we evaluated behavioral differences between cues with Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer. In two phases, participants learned (1) the association between distinct stimuli and cigarette or food outcomes and, (2) specific instrumental responses that yielded such outcomes. Motivated behavior was probed under extinction in a subsequent transfer test assessing instrumental responding in the presence of the cues.

Results

Participants showed an increase in specific responding (eg, instrumental response associated with cigarette) when faced with the corresponding appetitive cue (eg, stimulus associated with cigarette) despite absence of outcome. Notably, they made more cigarette-seeking than food-seeking instrumental responses, suggesting that cues representative of cigarette outcomes exert stronger influences on behavior than non-drug (food) cues. Using a measure of subjective preference, we also observed that greater preference for cigarette-compared to food-cues correlated with increased cigarette-seeking behavior in the test phase.

Conclusion

Taken together, these results highlight how drug and non-drug cues differentially influence reward-seeking behaviors during deprivation, which has implications for smoking cessation treatment and relapse.

Implications

This study examines the motivational influence of both drug and non-drug cues within a single sample of cigarette smokers. Our results demonstrate that the motivational properties of smoking cues differ from cues relating to other types of reward, such as food. This research informs smoking cessation programs to target the salience of nicotine cues and the maladaptive drug-seeking behaviors prompted by them.

Triggering Avoidance: Dissociable Influences of Aversive Pavlovian Conditioned Stimuli on Human Instrumental Behavior

The present study investigates human aversive Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer (PIT) and possible influences of outcome devaluation and instrumental overtraining on this effect. PIT measures the extent to which a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS) can increase instrumental responses independently paired with the same (outcome-specific transfer) or a different (general transfer) reinforcer. Two measures of PIT were obtained: the percentage of instrumental responses and the vigor of such responses. Thirty-eight volunteers performed a standard PIT task sequence. Results showed a double dissociation between outcome-specific and general transfer: the first selectively expressed in the amount of responses, the second in the vigor measure solely. Furthermore, outcome-specific transfer was enhanced by overtraining, but not affected by devaluation. General transfer, on the other hand, was affected by neither overtraining, nor devaluation. A positive correlation between general transfer and sensitivity to punishments was found. Findings are discussed in terms of hypothetically different underlying neurobehavioral mechanisms and their relations to habits and goal-directed behavior.

Stress associated changes in Pavlovian-instrumental transfer in humans

Predictive learning is known to influence instrumental responding for reward. Cues associated with an instrumental outcome can influence performance in two ways: (a) by selectively promoting actions associated with the outcome predicted by the cue (specific transfer), and (b) by increasing motivation and the vigour of instrumental responding (general transfer). To examine these two distinct processes in humans we developed a novel behavioural task in which participants were able to liberate junk-food snacks from a virtual vending machine. Additionally, the relationship between stress and cue-driven reward seeking was examined using participant scores on the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS). Reward-paired cues were found to separately bias action selection and influence the rate of responding for rewards. Furthermore, the effects of reward-paired cues on the rate of responding for reward was influenced by increased stress and anxiety. Increased levels of stress and anxiety were associated particularly with changes in cue-driven response vigour; whereas high levels of stress and anxiety were associated with elevated responding above baseline in the presence of a cue associated with a non-rewarding outcome, participants with low levels of anxiety and stress showed appropriate suppression of responding during this cue. These differences in performance between high and low anxiety and stress participants provides initial evidence that, as has been demonstrated in rodents, stress affects the influence of cue-driven response vigour in humans.

Monetary, Food, and Social Rewards Induce Similar Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer Effects

Multiple types of reward, such as money, food or social approval, are capable of driving behavior. However, most previous investigations have only focused on one of these reward classes in isolation, as such it is not clear whether different reward classes have a unique influence on instrumental responding or whether the subjective value of the reward, rather than the reward type per se, is most important in driving behavior. Here, we investigate behavior using a well-established reward paradigm, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), and three different reward types: monetary, food and social rewards. The subjective value of each reward type was matched using a modified Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) auction where subjective reward value was expressed through physical effort using a bimanual grip force task. We measured the influence of reward-associated stimuli on how participants distributed forces between hands when reaching a target effort range on the screen bimanually and on how much time participants spent in this target range. Participants spent significantly more time in the target range (15% ± 2% maximal voluntary contraction) when a stimulus was presented that was associated with a reward used during instrumental conditioning or Pavlovian conditioning compared to a stimulus associated with a neutral outcome (i.e., general PIT). The strength of the PIT effect was modulated by subjective value (i.e., individuals who showed a stronger PIT effect rated the value of rewards more highly), but not by reward type, demonstrating that stimuli of all reward types were able to act as appetitive reinforcers and influenced instrumental responding, when matched to the same subjective reward value. This is the first demonstration that individually matched monetary, food and social rewards are equally effective as appetitive reinforcers in PIT. These findings strengthen the hypotheses that the subjective value is crucial for how much reward-associated stimuli influence behavior.

Predictive but not emotional value of Pavlovian stimuli leads to pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer

•

Pavlovian stimuli (CSs) of different reward value induce outcome specific transfer.

•

Knowledge of the predicted outcome appears necessary for the transfer to occur.

•

Emotional response to CSs occurs without knowledge of predicted outcome.

•

Emotional response to CSs is not sufficient to elicit transfer.

Reward-predictive stimuli augment instrumental reward-seeking in humans, an effect denoted Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), but the role of differential reward value of these stimuli and of emotional conditioned responses in PIT remains unknown.

Fifty one participants experienced a Pavlovian phase that associated two stimuli with either 10p (CS10) or 50p (CS50). Next, participants underwent instrumental training for two responses reinforced with either 10p or 50p. Finally, the transfer phase continued as had instrumental training, now in the presence of the Pavlovian stimuli.

Participants were dichotomised as aware/unaware according to their expectancy awareness of the CS → outcome associations. Only aware participants demonstrated PIT (increased choice and number of responses on the 10p and 50p response key in the presence of CS10 and CS50 respectively), yet both aware and unaware groups rated the 50p stimulus as more pleasant than the 10p stimulus.

These findings suggest that expectancy of reward is necessary for PIT; however, emotional conditioned responses appear not sufficient to influence PIT. Future research should attempt to manipulate emotional conditioned responses in a PIT context, to test the sufficiency of reward expectancy in PIT.

Dopamine D2/3- and μ-opioid receptor antagonists reduce cue-induced responding and reward impulsivity in humans

Increased responding to drug-associated stimuli (cue reactivity) and an inability to tolerate delayed gratification (reward impulsivity) have been implicated in the development and maintenance of drug addiction. Whereas data from animal studies suggest that both the dopamine and opioid system are involved in these two reward-related processes, their role in humans is less clear. Moreover, dopaminergic and opioidergic drugs have not been directly compared with regard to these functions, even though a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms might inform the development of specific treatments for elevated cue reactivity and reward impulsivity. In a randomized, double-blind, between-subject design we administered the selective dopamine D2/D3 receptor antagonist amisulpride (400 mg, n=41), the unspecific opioid receptor antagonist naltrexone (50 mg, n=40) or placebo (n=40) to healthy humans and measured cue-induced responding with a Pavlovian-instrumental transfer task and reward impulsivity with a delay discounting task. Mood was assessed using a visual analogue scale. Compared with placebo, amisulpride significantly suppressed cue-induced responding and reward impulsivity. The effects of naltrexone were similar, although less pronounced. Both amisulpride and naltrexone decreased average mood ratings compared with placebo. Our results demonstrate that a selective blockade of dopamine D2/D3 receptors reduces cue-induced responding and reward impulsivity in healthy humans. Antagonizing μ-opioid receptors has similar effects for cue-induced responding and to a lesser extent for reward impulsivity.

Effects of early life stress on amygdala and striatal development

Species-expected caregiving early in life is critical for the normative development and regulation of emotional behavior, the ability to effectively evaluate affective stimuli in the environment, and the ability to sustain social relationships. Severe psychosocial stressors early in life (early life stress; ELS) in the form of the absence of species expected caregiving (i.e., caregiver deprivation), can drastically impact one's social and emotional success, leading to the onset of internalizing illness later in life. Development of the amygdala and striatum, two key regions supporting affective valuation and learning, is significantly affected by ELS, and their altered developmental trajectories have important implications for cognitive, behavioral and socioemotional development. However, an understanding of the impact of ELS on the development of functional interactions between these regions and subsequent behavioral effects is lacking. In this review, we highlight the roles of the amygdala and striatum in affective valuation and learning in maturity and across development. We discuss their function separately as well as their interaction. We highlight evidence across species characterizing how ELS induced changes in the development of the amygdala and striatum mediate subsequent behavioral changes associated with internalizing illness, positing a particular import of the effect of ELS on their interaction.

Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer effects in the nucleus accumbens relate to relapse in alcohol dependence

In detoxified alcohol-dependent patients, alcohol-related stimuli can promote relapse. However, to date, the mechanisms by which contextual stimuli promote relapse have not been elucidated in detail. One hypothesis is that such contextual stimuli directly stimulate the motivation to drink via associated brain regions like the ventral striatum and thus promote alcohol seeking, intake and relapse. Pavlovian-to-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) may be one of those behavioral phenomena contributing to relapse, capturing how Pavlovian conditioned (contextual) cues determine instrumental behavior (e.g. alcohol seeking and intake). We used a PIT paradigm during functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine the effects of classically conditioned Pavlovian stimuli on instrumental choices in n = 31 detoxified patients diagnosed with alcohol dependence and n = 24 healthy controls matched for age and gender. Patients were followed up over a period of 3 months. We observed that (1) there was a significant behavioral PIT effect for all participants, which was significantly more pronounced in alcohol-dependent patients; (2) PIT was significantly associated with blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signals in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) in subsequent relapsers only; and (3) PIT-related NAcc activation was associated with, and predictive of, critical outcomes (amount of alcohol intake and relapse during a 3 months follow-up period) in alcohol-dependent patients. These observations show for the first time that PIT-related BOLD signals, as a measure of the influence of Pavlovian cues on instrumental behavior, predict alcohol intake and relapse in alcohol dependence.

The role of opioid processes in reward and decision-making

Contemporary theories emphasize the involvement of the endogenous opioid system in assigning hedonic values to rewards. Although earlier research supports this view, recent findings suggest that opioids play a larger and more complex role in reward processes than these theories suggest. For example, opioid activity in the basolateral amygdala is required for encoding incentive learning, a process by which the value of goal-directed actions is updated. Outside the amygdala, opioid receptors in the ventral striatum have been found to promote choice between different courses of action. Specifically, μ opioid receptors in the nucleus accumbens core and δ opioid receptors in the nucleus accumbens shell have been reported to mediate distinct aspects of incentive motivation; the core regulating the effect of experienced reward and the shell of predicted reward on choice. In both cases, the involvement of opioid receptors was restricted to the time of choice, although changes in their expression pattern could be observed prior to that point. This time-restricted involvement of opioid receptor-related processes is consistent with the view that opioids in the nucleus accumbens are central components of the limbic-motor interface, integrating reward-related information with instrumental learning to guide decision-making, particularly the selection and execution of goal-directed actions.

LINKED ARTICLES

This article is part of a themed section on Opioids: New Pathways to Functional Selectivity. To view the other articles in this section visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bph.2015.172.issue-2.

The good, the bad and the brain: Neural correlates of appetitive and aversive values underlying decision making

Approaching rewards and avoiding punishments could be considered as core principles governing behavior. Experiments from behavioral economics have shown that choices involving gains and losses follow different policy rules, suggesting that appetitive and aversive processes might rely on different brain systems. Here we contrast this hypothesis with recent neuroscience studies exploring the human brain from brainstem nuclei to cortical areas. Although some circuits show rigid specialization, many others appear to process both appetitive and aversive stimuli, in a flexible manner that depends on a context-wise subjective reference point. Moreover, appetitive and aversive aspects are often integrated into net values that are signaled with enhanced activity in 'positive regions', and suppressed activity in 'negative regions'. This dichotomy might explain why drugs or lesions can produce valence-specific effects, biasing decisions towards approaching a reward or avoiding a punishment.

Goal-directed, habitual and Pavlovian prosocial behavior

Although prosocial behaviors have been widely studied across disciplines, the mechanisms underlying them are not fully understood. Evidence from psychology, biology and economics suggests that prosocial behaviors can be driven by a variety of seemingly opposing factors: altruism or egoism, intuition or deliberation, inborn instincts or learned dispositions, and utility derived from actions or their outcomes. Here we propose a framework inspired by research on reinforcement learning and decision making that links these processes and explains characteristics of prosocial behaviors in different contexts. More specifically, we suggest that prosocial behaviors inherit features of up to three decision-making systems employed to choose between self- and other- regarding acts: a goal-directed system that selects actions based on their predicted consequences, a habitual system that selects actions based on their reinforcement history, and a Pavlovian system that emits reflexive responses based on evolutionarily prescribed priors. This framework, initially described in the field of cognitive neuroscience and machine learning, provides insight into the potential neural circuits and computations shaping prosocial behaviors. Furthermore, it identifies specific conditions in which each of these three systems should dominate and promote other- or self- regarding behavior.

Taking action in the face of threat: neural synchronization predicts adaptive coping

The ability to take action in the face of threat is highly diverse across individuals. What are the neural processes that determine individual differences in the ability to cope with danger? We hypothesized that the extent of synchronization between amygdala, striatum, and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) would predict successful active coping performance. To test this, we developed a novel computer task based on the principals of Sidman avoidance. Healthy human participants learned through trial and error to move a marker between virtual game board compartments once every 3 s to avoid mild shocks. Behaviorally, participants exhibited large individual differences. Strikingly, both amygdala-mPFC and caudate-mPFC coupling during active coping trials covaried with final active coping performance across participants. These findings indicate that synchronization between mPFC subregions, and both amygdala and caudate predicts whether individuals will achieve successful active coping performance by the end of training. Thus, successful performance of adaptive actions in the face of threat requires functional synchronization of a neural circuit consisting of mPFC, striatum, and amygdala. Malfunction in the crosstalk between these components might underlie anxiety symptoms and impair individuals' ability to actively cope under stress. This opens an array of possibilities for therapeutic targets for fear and anxiety disorders.

Serotonin and dopamine differentially affect appetitive and aversive general Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer

RATIONALE

Human motivation and decision-making is influenced by the interaction of Pavlovian and instrumental systems. The neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin have been suggested to play a major role in motivation and decision-making, but how they affect this interaction in humans is largely unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the effect of these neurotransmitters in a general Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) task which measured the nonspecific effect of appetitive and aversive Pavlovian cues on instrumental responses.

METHODS

For that purpose, we used selective dietary depletion of the amino acid precursors of serotonin and dopamine: tryptophan (n = 34) and tyrosine/phenylalanine (n = 35), respectively, and compared the performance of these groups to a control group (n = 34) receiving a nondepleted (balanced) amino acid drink.

RESULTS

We found that PIT differed between groups: Relative to the control group that exhibited only appetitive PIT, we found reduced appetitive PIT in the tyrosine/phenylalanine-depleted group and enhanced aversive PIT in the tryptophan-depleted group.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate a differential involvement of serotonin and dopamine in motivated behavior. They suggest that reductions in serotonin enhance the motivational influence of aversive stimuli on instrumental behavior and do not affect the influence of appetitive stimuli, while reductions in dopamine diminish the influence of appetitive stimuli. No conclusions could be drawn about how dopamine affects the influence of aversive stimuli. The interplay of both neurotransmitter systems allows for flexible and adaptive responses depending on the behavioral context.

Medial amygdala lesions selectively block aversive pavlovian-instrumental transfer in rats

Pavlovian conditioned stimuli (CSs) play an important role in the reinforcement and motivation of instrumental active avoidance (AA). Conditioned threats can also invigorate ongoing AA responding [aversive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT)]. The neural circuits mediating AA are poorly understood, although lesion studies suggest that lateral, basal, and central amygdala nuclei, as well as infralimbic prefrontal cortex, make key, and sometimes opposing, contributions. We recently completed an extensive analysis of brain c-Fos expression in good vs. poor avoiders following an AA test (Martinez et al., 2013, Learning and Memory). This analysis identified medial amygdala (MeA) as a potentially important region for Pavlovian motivation of instrumental actions. MeA is known to mediate defensive responding to innate threats as well as social behaviors, but its role in mediating aversive Pavlovian-instrumental interactions is unknown. We evaluated the effect of MeA lesions on Pavlovian conditioning, Sidman two-way AA conditioning (shuttling) and aversive PIT in rats. Mild footshocks served as the unconditioned stimulus in all conditioning phases. MeA lesions had no effect on AA but blocked the expression of aversive PIT and 22 kHz ultrasonic vocalizations in the AA context. Interestingly, MeA lesions failed to affect Pavlovian freezing to discrete threats but reduced freezing to contextual threats when assessed outside of the AA chamber. These findings differentiate MeA from lateral and central amygdala, as lesions of these nuclei disrupt Pavlovian freezing and aversive PIT, but have opposite effects on AA performance. Taken together, these results suggest that MeA plays a selective role in the motivation of instrumental avoidance by general or uncertain Pavlovian threats.