Emotions and individual differences shape human foraging under threat

Abstract

A common behavior in natural environments is foraging for rewards. However, this is often in the presence of predators. Therefore, one of the most fundamental decisions for humans, as for other animals, is how to apportion time between reward-motivated pursuit behavior and threat-motivated checking behavior. To understand what affects how people strike this balance, we developed an ecologically inspired task and looked at both within-participant dynamics (moods) and between-participant individual differences (questionnaires about real-life behaviors) in two large internet samples (n = 374 and n = 702) in a cross-sectional design. For the within-participant dynamics, we found that people regulate task-evoked stress homeostatically by changing behavior (increasing foraging and hiding). Individual differences, even in superficially related traits (apathy–anhedonia and anxiety–compulsive checking) reliably mapped onto unique behaviors. Worse task performance, due to maladaptive checking, was linked to gender (women checked excessively) and specific anxiety-related traits: somatic anxiety (reduced self-reported checking due to worry) and compulsivity (self-reported disorganized checking). While anhedonia decreased self-reported task engagement, apathy, strikingly, improved overall task performance by reducing excessive checking. In summary, we provide a multifaceted paradigm for assessment of checking for threat in a naturalistic task that is sensitive to both moods as they change throughout the task and clinical dimensions. Thus, it could serve as an objective measurement tool for future clinical studies interested in threat, vigilance or behavior–emotion interactions in contexts requiring both reward seeking and threat avoidance. This study explores the impact of mood and individual differences on trading off between possible rewards and checking for the presence for threat and escaping to safety in a gamified foraging task.