Cited by 40Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorMotor Control and Adaptation

The rewarding value of good motor performance in the context of monetary incentives

Lutz, Kai, Pedroni, Andreas, Nadig, Karin, Luechinger, Roger, Jäncke, Lutz·2012·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

Whether an agent receives positive task feedback or a monetary reward, neural activity in their striatum increases. In the latter case striatal activity reflects extrinsic reward processing, while in the former, striatal activity reflects the intrinsically rewarding effects of performing well. There can be a "hidden cost of reward", which is a detrimental effect of extrinsic on intrinsic reward value. This raises the question how these two types of reward interact. To address this, we applied a monetary incentive delay task: in all trials participants received feedback depending on their performance. In half of the trials they could additionally receive monetary reward if they performed well. This resulted in high performance trials, which were monetarily rewarded and high performance trials that were not. This made it possible to dissociate the neural correlates of performance feedback from the neural correlates of monetary reward that comes with high performance. Performance feedback alone elicits activation increases in the ventral striatum. This activation increases due to additional monetary reward. Neural response in the dorsal striatum on the other hand is only significantly increased by feedback when a monetary incentive is present. The quality of performance does not significantly influence dorsal striatum activity. In conclusion, our results indicate that the dorsal striatum is primarily sensitive to optional or actually received external rewards, whereas the ventral striatum may be coding intrinsic reward due to positive performance feedback. Thus the ventral striatum is suggested to be involved in the processing of intrinsically motivated behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.03.030

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lutz, K., Pedroni, A., Nadig, K., Luechinger, R., & Jäncke, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Lutz, Kai
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
50
Issue
8
Pages
1739-1747
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978398959
Cited by
40
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
swiss national science foundation (320030-777111)
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
intrinsic rewards, extrinsic rewards, monetary rewards, performance feedback, ventral striatum, dorsal striatum, reward processing, motor performance
MeSH terms
Adult, Basal Ganglia, Brain Mapping, Corpus Striatum, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Motivation, Psychomotor Performance, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward, Feedback, Psychological, Functional Neuroimaging

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