↓ Skip to main content

The Role of the Striatum in Effort-Based Decision-Making in the Absence of Reward

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Role of the Striatum in Effort-Based Decision-Making in the Absence of Reward
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, February 2014
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.1214-13.2014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathalie Schouppe, Jelle Demanet, Carsten N. Boehler, K. Richard Ridderinkhof, Wim Notebaert

Abstract

Decision-making involves weighing costs against benefits, for instance, in terms of the effort it takes to obtain a reward of a given magnitude. This evaluation process has been linked to the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) and the striatum, with activation in these brain structures reflecting the discounting effect of effort on reward. Here, we investigate how cognitive effort influences neural choice processes in the absence of an extrinsic reward. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging in humans, we used an effort-based decision-making task in which participants were required to choose between two options for a subsequent flanker task that differed in the amount of cognitive effort. Cognitive effort was manipulated by varying the proportion of incongruent trials associated with each choice option. Choice-locked activation in the striatum was higher when participants chose voluntarily for the more effortful alternative but displayed the opposite trend on forced-choice trials. The dACC revealed a similar, yet only trend-level significant, activation pattern. Our results imply that activation levels in the striatum reflect a cost-benefit analysis, in which a balance is made between effort discounting and the intrinsic motivation to choose a cognitively challenging task. Moreover, our findings indicate that it matters whether this challenge is voluntarily chosen or externally imposed. As such, the present findings contrast with classical findings on effort discounting that found reductions in striatum activation for higher effort by finding enhancements of the same neural circuits when a cognitively challenging task is voluntarily selected and does not entail the danger of losing reward.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Japan 3 1%
France 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 260 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 71 26%
Researcher 62 22%
Student > Bachelor 25 9%
Student > Master 24 9%
Professor 15 5%
Other 41 15%
Unknown 40 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 102 37%
Neuroscience 55 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 20 7%
Unknown 52 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2014.
All research outputs
#4,079,174
of 25,243,120 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#6,490
of 24,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,030
of 320,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#82
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,243,120 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.