MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295514733 · doi:10.1111/psyp.14176

Electrophysiological measures of conflict and reward processing are associated with decisions to engage in physical effort

2022· article· en· W4295514733 on OpenAlexafffund
Akina Umemoto, Hause Lin, Clay B. Holroyd

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Victoria
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyElectrophysiologyCognitive psychologySocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a key brain region involved in cognitive control and decision making, is suggested to mediate effort- and value-based decision making, but the specific role of ACC in this process remains debated. Here we used frontal midline theta (FMT) and the reward positivity (RewP) to examine ACC function in a value-based decision making task requiring physical effort. We investigated whether (1) FMT power is sensitive to the difficulty of the decision or to selecting effortful actions, and (2) RewP is sensitive to the subjective value of reward outcomes as a function of effort investment. On each trial, participants chose to execute a low-effort or a high-effort behavior (that required squeezing a hand-dynamometer) to obtain smaller or larger rewards, respectively, while their brainwaves were recorded. We replicated prior findings that tonic FMT increased over the course of the hour-long task, which suggests increased application of control in the face of growing fatigue. RewP amplitude also increased following execution of high-effort compared to low-effort behavior, consistent with increased valuation of reward outcomes by ACC. Although neither phasic nor tonic FMT were associated with decision difficulty or effort selection per se, an exploratory analysis revealed that the interaction of phasic FMT and expected value of choice predicted effort choice. This interaction suggests that phasic FMT increases specifically under situations of decision difficulty when participants ultimately select a high-effort choice. These results point to a unique role for ACC in motivating and persisting at effortful behavior when decision conflict is high.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.193
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207