Abstract

Animal research suggests trait-like individual variation in the degree of incentive salience attribution to reward-predictive cues, defined phenotypically as sign-tracking (high) and goal-tracking (low incentive salience attribution). While these phenotypes have been linked to addiction features in rodents, their translational validity is less clear. Here, we examined whether sign- and goal-tracking in healthy human volunteers modulates the effects of reward-paired cues on decision making. Sign-tracking was measured in a Pavlovian conditioning paradigm as the amount of eye gaze fixation on the reward-predictive cue versus the location of impending reward delivery. In Study 1 (Cherkasova et al., 2018), participants were randomly assigned to perform a binary choice task in which rewards were either accompanied (cued, n = 63) or unaccompanied (uncued, n = 68) by money images and casino jingles. In Study 2, participants (n = 58) performed cued and uncued versions of the task in a within-subjects design. Across both studies, cues promoted riskier choice. Sign-tracking was not associated with risky choice in either study. Goal-tracking rather than sign-tracking was significantly associated with greater risk-promoting effects of cues in Study 1 but not in Study 2, although the direction of findings was consistent across both studies. These findings are at odds with the notion of sign-trackers being preferentially susceptible to the influence of reward cues on behavior and point to the role of mechanisms besides incentive salience in mediating such influences.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call