Predicting outcomes of decisions in the brain

When making decisions, the outcomes of different choices play an important role. Feedback is mainly processed in terms of gains and losses. It is as yet unclear whether this distinction holds for predictable as well as unpredictable outcomes. Using ERPs, the present study aimed to determine whether predictable and unpredictable outcomes are coded differently in the brain. Participants had to choose between one of two options: the certain option was always associated with a gain of 10 euro, while the uncertain option entailed a gain of 30 euro or a loss of 10 euro, with a probability of 50% each. Overall, subjects showed a clear preference for the certain option, a tendency which became more pronounced during the course of the experiment. An early ERP component, the P200, reflected the predictability of outcomes, which was critical for the subsequent decisions. The later feedback related negativity (FRN) reflected the known distinction between gains and losses, while the N500 again reflected differential processing of predictable and unpredictable outcomes. Neither FRN nor the N500 were significantly related to behaviour. Predictability appears to play a central role in outcome evaluation.

[1]  L Carretié,et al.  Emotion, attention, and the 'negativity bias', studied through event-related potentials. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[2]  A. Sanfey,et al.  Independent Coding of Reward Magnitude and Valence in the Human Brain , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  Daeyeol Lee.  Neuroeconomics: making risky choices in the brain , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[4]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Topographic maps, source localization inference, and the reference electrode: comments on a paper by Desmedt et al. , 1993, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Neuroeconomics: cross-currents in research on decision-making , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  R. Pascual-Marqui.  Review of methods for solving the EEG inverse problem , 1999 .

[7]  D. Ellsberg.  Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[8]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[9]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Brain potentials associated with expected and unexpected good and bad outcomes. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[10]  M. Platt,et al.  Risk-sensitive neurons in macaque posterior cingulate cortex , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The feedback-related negativity reflects the binary evaluation of good versus bad outcomes , 2006, Biological Psychology.

[12]  L A Real,et al.  Animal choice behavior and the evolution of cognitive architecture , 1991, Science.

[13]  Matthew T. Kaufman,et al.  Distributed Neural Representation of Expected Value , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  W. Schultz,et al.  Adaptive Coding of Reward Value by Dopamine Neurons , 2005, Science.

[15]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Low resolution electromagnetic tomography: a new method for localizing electrical activity in the brain. , 1994, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[16]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  A mechanism for error detection in speeded response time tasks. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. , 2002, Psychological review.

[18]  Christian Bellebaum,et al.  Time course of cross-hemispheric spatial updating in the human parietal cortex , 2006, Behavioural Brain Research.

[19]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. , 1945 .

[20]  M. Congedo,et al.  Low-resolution electromagnetic tomography neurofeedback , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[21]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  J Vila,et al.  Cognitive versus motivational significance of the cardiac response to intense auditory stimulation. , 1989, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[23]  C. Padoa-Schioppa,et al.  Neurons in the orbitofrontal cortex encode economic value , 2006, Nature.

[24]  Michael X. Cohen,et al.  Reward expectation modulates feedback-related negativity and EEG spectra , 2007, NeuroImage.

[25]  F. Knight.  The economic nature of the firm: From Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit , 2009 .

[26]  Adrian R. Willoughby,et al.  The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses , 2002, Science.

[27]  J L Lancaster,et al.  Automated Talairach Atlas labels for functional brain mapping , 2000, Human brain mapping.

[28]  Vilfredo De Pascalis,et al.  The effect of temperamental traits on event-related potentials, heart rate and reaction time , 1999 .

[29]  Jacobo Albert,et al.  Neural response to sustained affective visual stimulation using an indirect task , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[30]  M. Junghöfer,et al.  The polar average reference effect: a bias in estimating the head surface integral in EEG recording , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[31]  Luis Carretié,et al.  Cortical response to subjectively unconscious danger , 2005, NeuroImage.

[32]  Niels Birbaumer,et al.  Motion and Emotion: Emotion Processing in Quadriplegic Patients and Athletes , 2005 .

[33]  E. Rolls,et al.  Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[34]  W. Schultz,et al.  Relative reward preference in primate orbitofrontal cortex , 1999, Nature.

[35]  C. Braun,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potentials Following Incorrect Feedback in a Time-Estimation Task: Evidence for a Generic Neural System for Error Detection , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.