Neural systems underlying aversive conditioning in humans with primary and secondary reinforcers

Mauricio R. Delgado, Rita L. Jou, Elizabeth A. Phelps

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Money is a secondary reinforcer commonly used across a range of disciplines in experimental paradigms investigating reward learning and decision-making. The effectiveness of monetary reinforcers during aversive learning and associated neural basis, however, remains a topic of debate. Specifically, it is unclear if the initial acquisition of aversive representations of monetary losses depends on similar neural systems as more traditional aversive conditioning that involves primary reinforcers. This study contrasts the efficacy of a biologically defined primary reinforcer (shock) and a socially defined secondary reinforcer (money) during aversive learning and its associated neural circuitry. During a two-part experiment, participants first played a gambling game where wins and losses were based on performance to gain an experimental bank. Participants were then exposed to two separate aversive conditioning sessions. In one session, a primary reinforcer (mild shock) served as an unconditioned stimulus (US) and was paired with one of two colored squares, the conditioned stimuli (CS+ and CS-, respectively). In another session, a secondary reinforcer (loss of money) served as the US and was paired with one of two different CS. Skin conductance responses were greater for CS+ compared to CS- trials irrespective of type of reinforcer. Neuroimaging results revealed that the striatum, a region typically linked with reward-related processing, was found to be involved in the acquisition of aversive conditioned response irrespective of reinforcer type. In contrast, the amygdala was involved during aversive conditioning with primary reinforcers, as suggested by both an exploratory fMRI analysis and a follow-up case study with a patient with bilateral amygdala damage. Taken together, these results suggest that learning about potential monetary losses may depend on reinforcement learning related systems, rather than on typical structures involved in more biologically based fears.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberArticle 71
JournalFrontiers in Neuroscience
Issue numberMAY
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Learning
Amygdala
Reward
Shock
Gambling
Neuroimaging
Fear
Decision Making
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Conditioning (Psychology)
Skin

Keywords

  • Amygdala
  • Aversive learning
  • Fear conditioning
  • Insula
  • Reinforcement
  • Reward
  • Striatum

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience(all)

Cite this

Neural systems underlying aversive conditioning in humans with primary and secondary reinforcers. / Delgado, Mauricio R.; Jou, Rita L.; Phelps, Elizabeth A.

In: Frontiers in Neuroscience, No. MAY, Article 71, 2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{03eb6a4d86dd48d5be0e5db479591ca7,
title = "Neural systems underlying aversive conditioning in humans with primary and secondary reinforcers",
abstract = "Money is a secondary reinforcer commonly used across a range of disciplines in experimental paradigms investigating reward learning and decision-making. The effectiveness of monetary reinforcers during aversive learning and associated neural basis, however, remains a topic of debate. Specifically, it is unclear if the initial acquisition of aversive representations of monetary losses depends on similar neural systems as more traditional aversive conditioning that involves primary reinforcers. This study contrasts the efficacy of a biologically defined primary reinforcer (shock) and a socially defined secondary reinforcer (money) during aversive learning and its associated neural circuitry. During a two-part experiment, participants first played a gambling game where wins and losses were based on performance to gain an experimental bank. Participants were then exposed to two separate aversive conditioning sessions. In one session, a primary reinforcer (mild shock) served as an unconditioned stimulus (US) and was paired with one of two colored squares, the conditioned stimuli (CS+ and CS-, respectively). In another session, a secondary reinforcer (loss of money) served as the US and was paired with one of two different CS. Skin conductance responses were greater for CS+ compared to CS- trials irrespective of type of reinforcer. Neuroimaging results revealed that the striatum, a region typically linked with reward-related processing, was found to be involved in the acquisition of aversive conditioned response irrespective of reinforcer type. In contrast, the amygdala was involved during aversive conditioning with primary reinforcers, as suggested by both an exploratory fMRI analysis and a follow-up case study with a patient with bilateral amygdala damage. Taken together, these results suggest that learning about potential monetary losses may depend on reinforcement learning related systems, rather than on typical structures involved in more biologically based fears.",
keywords = "Amygdala, Aversive learning, Fear conditioning, Insula, Reinforcement, Reward, Striatum",
author = "Delgado, {Mauricio R.} and Jou, {Rita L.} and Phelps, {Elizabeth A.}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.3389/fnins.2011.00071",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Frontiers in Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-4548",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",
number = "MAY",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Neural systems underlying aversive conditioning in humans with primary and secondary reinforcers

AU - Delgado, Mauricio R.

AU - Jou, Rita L.

AU - Phelps, Elizabeth A.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Money is a secondary reinforcer commonly used across a range of disciplines in experimental paradigms investigating reward learning and decision-making. The effectiveness of monetary reinforcers during aversive learning and associated neural basis, however, remains a topic of debate. Specifically, it is unclear if the initial acquisition of aversive representations of monetary losses depends on similar neural systems as more traditional aversive conditioning that involves primary reinforcers. This study contrasts the efficacy of a biologically defined primary reinforcer (shock) and a socially defined secondary reinforcer (money) during aversive learning and its associated neural circuitry. During a two-part experiment, participants first played a gambling game where wins and losses were based on performance to gain an experimental bank. Participants were then exposed to two separate aversive conditioning sessions. In one session, a primary reinforcer (mild shock) served as an unconditioned stimulus (US) and was paired with one of two colored squares, the conditioned stimuli (CS+ and CS-, respectively). In another session, a secondary reinforcer (loss of money) served as the US and was paired with one of two different CS. Skin conductance responses were greater for CS+ compared to CS- trials irrespective of type of reinforcer. Neuroimaging results revealed that the striatum, a region typically linked with reward-related processing, was found to be involved in the acquisition of aversive conditioned response irrespective of reinforcer type. In contrast, the amygdala was involved during aversive conditioning with primary reinforcers, as suggested by both an exploratory fMRI analysis and a follow-up case study with a patient with bilateral amygdala damage. Taken together, these results suggest that learning about potential monetary losses may depend on reinforcement learning related systems, rather than on typical structures involved in more biologically based fears.

AB - Money is a secondary reinforcer commonly used across a range of disciplines in experimental paradigms investigating reward learning and decision-making. The effectiveness of monetary reinforcers during aversive learning and associated neural basis, however, remains a topic of debate. Specifically, it is unclear if the initial acquisition of aversive representations of monetary losses depends on similar neural systems as more traditional aversive conditioning that involves primary reinforcers. This study contrasts the efficacy of a biologically defined primary reinforcer (shock) and a socially defined secondary reinforcer (money) during aversive learning and its associated neural circuitry. During a two-part experiment, participants first played a gambling game where wins and losses were based on performance to gain an experimental bank. Participants were then exposed to two separate aversive conditioning sessions. In one session, a primary reinforcer (mild shock) served as an unconditioned stimulus (US) and was paired with one of two colored squares, the conditioned stimuli (CS+ and CS-, respectively). In another session, a secondary reinforcer (loss of money) served as the US and was paired with one of two different CS. Skin conductance responses were greater for CS+ compared to CS- trials irrespective of type of reinforcer. Neuroimaging results revealed that the striatum, a region typically linked with reward-related processing, was found to be involved in the acquisition of aversive conditioned response irrespective of reinforcer type. In contrast, the amygdala was involved during aversive conditioning with primary reinforcers, as suggested by both an exploratory fMRI analysis and a follow-up case study with a patient with bilateral amygdala damage. Taken together, these results suggest that learning about potential monetary losses may depend on reinforcement learning related systems, rather than on typical structures involved in more biologically based fears.

KW - Amygdala

KW - Aversive learning

KW - Fear conditioning

KW - Insula

KW - Reinforcement

KW - Reward

KW - Striatum

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80054810044&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80054810044&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fnins.2011.00071

DO - 10.3389/fnins.2011.00071

M3 - Article

JO - Frontiers in Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Neuroscience

SN - 1662-4548

IS - MAY

M1 - Article 71

ER -