Electrophysiological reward signals predict episodic memory for immediate and delayed positive feedback events

Curiosity Satisfaction Increases Event-related Potentials Sensitive to Reward

Successful learning depends on various factors such as depth of processing, motivation, or curiosity about information. A strong drive to learn something or the expectation of receiving a reward can be crucial to enhance learning. However, the influence of curiosity on the processing of new information and its similarity with reward processing is not well understood. This study examined whether states of curiosity influence specific ERPs associated with reward processing and whether these ERPs are related with later memory benefits. In an initial screening phase, participants indicated their curiosity and confidence in prior knowledge about answers to various trivia questions. In a subsequent study phase, we targeted different time windows related to reward processing during the presentation of trivia answers containing the reward positivity (RewP; 250-350 msec), the P3 (250-500 msec), and the late-positive-potential (LPP; 600-1000 msec). In a following surprise memory test, we found that participants recalled more high- than low-curiosity answers. The RewP, P3, and LPP showed greater positive mean amplitudes for high compared with low curiosity, reflecting increased reward processing. In addition, we found that the RewP and the P3 showed more positive mean amplitudes for later recalled compared with later forgotten answers, but curiosity did not modulate this encoding-related results. These findings support the view that the satisfaction of curiosity resembles reward processing, indicated by ERPs.

Prediction-error-dependent processing of immediate and delayed positive feedback

Learning often involves trial-and-error, i.e. repeating behaviours that lead to desired outcomes, and adjusting behaviour when outcomes do not meet our expectations and thus lead to prediction errors (PEs). PEs have been shown to be reflected in the reward positivity (RewP), an event-related potential (ERP) component between 200 and 350 ms after performance feedback which is linked to striatal processing and assessed via electroencephalography (EEG). Here we show that this is also true for delayed feedback processing, for which a critical role of the hippocampus has been suggested. We found a general reduction of the RewP for delayed feedback, but the PE was similarly reflected in the RewP and the later P300 for immediate and delayed positive feedback, while no effect was found for negative feedback. Our results suggest that, despite processing differences between immediate and delayed feedback, positive PEs drive feedback processing and learning irrespective of delay.

Win, lose, or draw: Examining salience, reward memory, and depression with the reward positivity

The reward positivity (RewP) is a putative biomarker of depression. Careful control of stimulus properties and manipulation of both stimulus valence and salience could facilitate interpretation of the RewP. RewP interpretation could further be improved by investigating functional outcomes of a blunted RewP in depression, such as reduced memory for rewarding outcomes. This study sought to advance RewP interpretation first by advancing task design through use of neutral (i.e., draw) control trials and counterbalanced feedback stimuli. Second, we examined the RewP's association with memory and the impact of depression. Undergraduates completed self-report measures of depression and anhedonia prior to a modified doors task in which words were displayed in colored fonts that indicated win, loss, or draw feedback. Memory of the feedback associated with each word (i.e., source memory) was tested. Results showed that RewP response to wins was more positive than to losses, which was more positive than to draws. The RewP was not associated with depression or anhedonia. The low depression group showed a source memory advantage for win words, but the high depression group did not. Source memory showed small relations to the RewP, but these did not survive Bonferroni correction. Results suggest the RewP is sensitive to salience and highlight challenges in detecting an association between the RewP and depression in modified doors tasks. Findings indicate that depression is related to dysfunctional source memory for reward but not loss and that future research should probe the possible associations between the RewP and memory in depression.

Learning to deal with delayed outcomes: EEG oscillatory and slow potentials during the prefeedback interval

It is well established that the stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN) decreases in amplitude as a task is mastered, a phenomenon generally attributed to the reduction in anticipatory attention as feedback becomes less needed. Typically, the experiments supporting this assumption have used relatively short delays (<3 s). However, we found in a previous study that this decline in amplitude, although present during the 2.5-s prefeedback delay of a patterned key-pressing task, was absent with an 8-s delay. We reexamined this finding using a 6-s delay and found that the SPN diminished at frontal sites as participants learned a sequence of four keypress durations, but that this modulation was limited to the early half of the delay (maximum at 2 s). Decline of lateralized sensorimotor theta activity across trials was also limited to early portions of the delay. These findings suggest that processes other than anticipatory attention to feedback may be more relevant for explaining SPN diminution. Such processes could include adjustment and maintenance of action-outcome expectancies (e.g., forward models) during the prefeedback interval.

Subjective preferences differentially modulate the processing of rewards gained by own vs. observed choices

The present EEG study investigated the impact of subjective reward preferences and agency on outcome processing. 47 healthy adults (11 male; 36 female) with preferences for either milk or white chocolate completed two runs of a gambling task involving their preferred chocolate (high preference outcomes, HPOs), non-preferred chocolate (medium preference outcomes, MPOs), and a lesser liked non-chocolate reward (low preference outcomes, LPOs). In the 'active' run, subjects chose between three different response options to receive the outcomes. In the 'observational' run, they observed another person's choices and subsequent outcomes. Cluster-based permutation analyses of event-related potential (ERPs) revealed that early processing in the P2 time window reflected outcome salience, differentiating HPOs and MPOs from LPOs, especially for outcomes following own choices, while not distinguishing between HPOs and MPOs. In contrast, processing in later stages, i.e., the typical time windows for feedback-related negativity (FRN) and P300, showed evidence of differential coding of HPOs and MPOs and was also modulated by agency. ERPs clearly differentiated between all three outcome types in the FRN and P300 time windows for outcomes following active but not for observed choices. The present study adds to evidence for modulation of outcome processing by contextual and inter-individual factors. In particular, our findings suggest that subjective preferences are complementarily represented in subjective reward valuation and in motivational value representations indexed by the FRN and the P300.