海马体损伤破坏了潜在的决策过程,潜在的决策过程是人类避免冲突处理的基础。

IF 9.8 1区 生物学 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
PLoS Biology Pub Date : 2025-02-11 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003033
Willem Le Duc, Christopher R Butler, Georgios P D Argyropoulos, Sonja Chu, Cendri Hutcherson, Anthony C Ruocco, Rutsuko Ito, Andy C H Lee
{"title":"海马体损伤破坏了潜在的决策过程,潜在的决策过程是人类避免冲突处理的基础。","authors":"Willem Le Duc, Christopher R Butler, Georgios P D Argyropoulos, Sonja Chu, Cendri Hutcherson, Anthony C Ruocco, Rutsuko Ito, Andy C H Lee","doi":"10.1371/journal.pbio.3003033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rodent and human data implicate the hippocampus in the arbitration of approach-avoidance conflict (AAC), which arises when an organism is confronted with a stimulus associated simultaneously with reward and punishment. Yet, the precise contributions of this structure are underexplored, particularly with respect to the decision-making processes involved. We assessed humans with hippocampal damage and matched neurologically healthy controls on a computerized AAC paradigm in which participants first learned whether individual visual images were associated with the reward or loss of game points and were then asked to approach or avoid pairs of stimuli with non-conflicting or conflicting valences. To assess hippocampal involvement more broadly in response conflict, we also administered a Stroop and a Go/No-go task. On the AAC paradigm, following similar learning outcomes in individuals with hippocampal damage and matched controls, both participant groups approached positive and negative image pairs at the same rate but critically, those with hippocampal damage approached conflict pairs more often than controls. Choice and response AAC data were interrogated using the hierarchical drift diffusion model, which revealed that, compared to controls, individuals with hippocampal damage were more biased towards approach, required less evidence to make a decision during conflict trials, and were slower to accumulate evidence towards avoidance when confronted with conflicting image pairs. No significant differences were found between groups in performance accuracy or response time on the response conflict tasks. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the importance of the hippocampus to the evidence accumulation processes supporting value-based decision-making under motivational conflict.</p>","PeriodicalId":49001,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Biology","volume":"23 2","pages":"e3003033"},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11849986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hippocampal damage disrupts the latent decision-making processes underlying approach-avoidance conflict processing in humans.\",\"authors\":\"Willem Le Duc, Christopher R Butler, Georgios P D Argyropoulos, Sonja Chu, Cendri Hutcherson, Anthony C Ruocco, Rutsuko Ito, Andy C H Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pbio.3003033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Rodent and human data implicate the hippocampus in the arbitration of approach-avoidance conflict (AAC), which arises when an organism is confronted with a stimulus associated simultaneously with reward and punishment. Yet, the precise contributions of this structure are underexplored, particularly with respect to the decision-making processes involved. We assessed humans with hippocampal damage and matched neurologically healthy controls on a computerized AAC paradigm in which participants first learned whether individual visual images were associated with the reward or loss of game points and were then asked to approach or avoid pairs of stimuli with non-conflicting or conflicting valences. To assess hippocampal involvement more broadly in response conflict, we also administered a Stroop and a Go/No-go task. On the AAC paradigm, following similar learning outcomes in individuals with hippocampal damage and matched controls, both participant groups approached positive and negative image pairs at the same rate but critically, those with hippocampal damage approached conflict pairs more often than controls. Choice and response AAC data were interrogated using the hierarchical drift diffusion model, which revealed that, compared to controls, individuals with hippocampal damage were more biased towards approach, required less evidence to make a decision during conflict trials, and were slower to accumulate evidence towards avoidance when confronted with conflicting image pairs. No significant differences were found between groups in performance accuracy or response time on the response conflict tasks. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the importance of the hippocampus to the evidence accumulation processes supporting value-based decision-making under motivational conflict.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Biology\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"e3003033\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11849986/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003033\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003033","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

啮齿类动物和人类的数据表明,当生物体同时面临与奖励和惩罚相关的刺激时,海马体就会出现接近-回避冲突(AAC)的仲裁。然而,这一结构的确切贡献尚未得到充分探讨,特别是在所涉及的决策过程方面。在计算机化的AAC范式中,我们评估了海马损伤患者和匹配的神经健康对照者。在AAC范式中,参与者首先了解了个人视觉图像是否与游戏积分的奖励或损失有关,然后被要求接近或避免对具有非冲突或冲突效价的刺激。为了更广泛地评估海马体对反应冲突的参与,我们还进行了Stroop和Go/No-go任务。在AAC范式中,海马损伤个体和匹配对照组的学习结果相似,两个参与者组都以相同的速度接近积极和消极图像对,但关键的是,海马损伤组比对照组更频繁地接近冲突图像对。使用分层漂移扩散模型对选择和反应AAC数据进行了查询,结果显示,与对照组相比,海马损伤的个体更倾向于接近,在冲突试验中做出决定所需的证据更少,并且在面对冲突图像对时积累回避证据的速度更慢。在反应冲突任务的表现准确性和反应时间上,两组间无显著差异。综上所述,这些发现证明了海马体在动机冲突下支持基于价值的决策的证据积累过程中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hippocampal damage disrupts the latent decision-making processes underlying approach-avoidance conflict processing in humans.

Rodent and human data implicate the hippocampus in the arbitration of approach-avoidance conflict (AAC), which arises when an organism is confronted with a stimulus associated simultaneously with reward and punishment. Yet, the precise contributions of this structure are underexplored, particularly with respect to the decision-making processes involved. We assessed humans with hippocampal damage and matched neurologically healthy controls on a computerized AAC paradigm in which participants first learned whether individual visual images were associated with the reward or loss of game points and were then asked to approach or avoid pairs of stimuli with non-conflicting or conflicting valences. To assess hippocampal involvement more broadly in response conflict, we also administered a Stroop and a Go/No-go task. On the AAC paradigm, following similar learning outcomes in individuals with hippocampal damage and matched controls, both participant groups approached positive and negative image pairs at the same rate but critically, those with hippocampal damage approached conflict pairs more often than controls. Choice and response AAC data were interrogated using the hierarchical drift diffusion model, which revealed that, compared to controls, individuals with hippocampal damage were more biased towards approach, required less evidence to make a decision during conflict trials, and were slower to accumulate evidence towards avoidance when confronted with conflicting image pairs. No significant differences were found between groups in performance accuracy or response time on the response conflict tasks. Taken together, these findings demonstrate the importance of the hippocampus to the evidence accumulation processes supporting value-based decision-making under motivational conflict.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS Biology
PLoS Biology BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY-BIOLOGY
CiteScore
15.40
自引率
2.00%
发文量
359
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Biology is the flagship journal of the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and focuses on publishing groundbreaking and relevant research in all areas of biological science. The journal features works at various scales, ranging from molecules to ecosystems, and also encourages interdisciplinary studies. PLOS Biology publishes articles that demonstrate exceptional significance, originality, and relevance, with a high standard of scientific rigor in methodology, reporting, and conclusions. The journal aims to advance science and serve the research community by transforming research communication to align with the research process. It offers evolving article types and policies that empower authors to share the complete story behind their scientific findings with a diverse global audience of researchers, educators, policymakers, patient advocacy groups, and the general public. PLOS Biology, along with other PLOS journals, is widely indexed by major services such as Crossref, Dimensions, DOAJ, Google Scholar, PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, and Web of Science. Additionally, PLOS Biology is indexed by various other services including AGRICOLA, Biological Abstracts, BIOSYS Previews, CABI CAB Abstracts, CABI Global Health, CAPES, CAS, CNKI, Embase, Journal Guide, MEDLINE, and Zoological Record, ensuring that the research content is easily accessible and discoverable by a wide range of audiences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信