Different neural systems adjust motor behavior in response to reward and punishment
Abstract
Individuals use the outcomes of their actions to adjust future behavior. However, it remains unclear whether the same neural circuits are used to adjust behavior due to rewarding and punishing outcomes. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and a reward-providing reaction time task to investigate the adaptation of a simple motor response following four different outcomes (delivery versus omission and monetary gain versus loss). We found that activation in the thalamus and insula predicted adjustments of motor responses due to outcomes that were cued and delivered, whereas activation in the ventral striatum predicted such adjustments when outcomes were cued but omitted. Further, activation of OFC predicted improvement after all punishing outcomes, independent of whether they were omitted rewards or delivered punishments. Finally, we found that activity in anterior cingulate predicted adjustment after delivered punishments and activity in dorsal striatum predicted adaptation after delivered rewards. Our results provide evidence that different but somewhat overlapping circuits mediate the same behavioral adaptation when it is driven by different incentive outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The neuroimaging literature is profoundly inconsistent on the role of the striatum in aversive learning, with some studies reporting increased VS activity in aversive contexts and others reporting decreased activity.
“the neuroimaging literature is profoundly inconsistent on this point, with some studies reporting increased VS activity in aversive contexts (Figure 2c) [62–64] and others reporting decreasing activity in this area during the prediction, learning, and receipt of aversive outcomes [65,66].”
From Contributions of the striatum to learning, motivation, and performance: an associative account (2012) · cites this paper as [64]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 57 · Cited by 172
- Authors
- Wrase, J., Kahnt, T., Schlagenhauf, F., Beck, A., Cohen, M. X., Knutson, B., & Heinz, A.
- Affiliations
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
- University of Bonn (DE)
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Heinz, Andreas
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1253-1262
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2083105609
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 7.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Keywords
- reward, punishment, thalamus, insula, ventral striatum, orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, dorsal striatum, monetary gains and losses
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Corpus Striatum, Dominance, Cerebral, Frontal Lobe, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Nerve Net, Occipital Lobe, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychomotor Performance, Punishment, Reaction Time, Reward, Statistics as Topic, Temporal Lobe, Thalamus, Feedback, Psychological
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review