↓ Skip to main content

Monetary rewards modulate inhibitory control

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
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
Monetary rewards modulate inhibitory control
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00257
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula M. Herrera, Mario Speranza, Adam Hampshire, Tristán A. Bekinschtein

Abstract

The ability to override a dominant response, often referred to as behavioral inhibition, is considered a key element of executive cognition. Poor behavioral inhibition is a defining characteristic of several neurological and psychiatric populations. Recently, there has been increasing interest in the motivational dimension of behavioral inhibition, with some experiments incorporating emotional contingencies in classical inhibitory paradigms such as the Go/NoGo and Stop Signal Tasks (SSTs). Several studies have reported a positive modulatory effect of reward on performance in pathological conditions such as substance abuse, pathological gambling, and Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD). However, experiments that directly investigate the modulatory effects of reward magnitudes on the performance of inhibitory tasks are scarce and little is known about the finer grained relationship between motivation and inhibitory control. Here we probed the effect of reward magnitude and context on behavioral inhibition with three modified versions of the widely used SST. The pilot study compared inhibition performance during six blocks alternating neutral feedback, low, medium, and high monetary rewards. Study One compared increasing vs. decreasing rewards, with low, high rewards, and neutral feedback; whilst Study Two compared low and high reward magnitudes alone also in an increasing and decreasing reward design. The reward magnitude effect was not demonstrated in the pilot study, probably due to a learning effect induced by practice in this lengthy task. The reward effect per se was weak but the context (order of reward) was clearly suggested in Study One, and was particularly strongly confirmed in study two. In addition, these findings revealed a "kick start effect" over global performance measures. Specifically, there was a long lasting improvement in performance throughout the task when participants received the highest reward magnitudes at the beginning of the protocol. These results demonstrate a dynamical behavioral inhibition capacity in humans, as illustrated by the reward magnitude modulation and initial reward history effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 136 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 20%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 33 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 57 41%
Neuroscience 15 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 38 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 20 August 2014.
All research outputs
#2,484,134
of 23,863,389 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,209
of 7,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,464
of 229,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#62
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,863,389 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 229,472 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 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 73% of its contemporaries.