前额中叶θ是接近-接近冲突与回避-回避冲突中冲突强度的指标。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES Social cognitive and affective neuroscience Pub Date : 2023-08-09 DOI:10.1093/scan/nsad038
Ariel Levy, Maya Enisman, Anat Perry, Tali Kleiman
{"title":"前额中叶θ是接近-接近冲突与回避-回避冲突中冲突强度的指标。","authors":"Ariel Levy, Maya Enisman, Anat Perry, Tali Kleiman","doi":"10.1093/scan/nsad038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The seminal theory of motivational conflicts distinguishes between approach-approach (AP-AP) conflicts, in which a decision is made between desirable alternatives, and avoidance-avoidance (AV-AV) conflicts, in which a decision is made between undesirable alternatives. The behavioral differences between AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are well documented: abundant research showed that AV-AV conflicts are more difficult to resolve than AP-AP ones. However, there is little to no research looking into the neural underpinnings of the differences between the two conflict types. Here, we show that midfrontal theta, an established neural marker of conflict, distinguished between the two conflict types such that midfrontal theta power was higher in AV-AV conflicts than in AP-AP conflicts. We further demonstrate that higher midfrontal theta power was associated with shorter decision times on a single-trial basis, indicating that midfrontal theta played a role in promoting successful controlled behavior. Taken together, our results show that AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are distinguishable on the neural level. The implications of these results go beyond motivational conflicts, as they establish midfrontal theta as a measure of the continuous degree of conflict in subjective decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":21789,"journal":{"name":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10411683/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Midfrontal theta as an index of conflict strength in approach-approach vs avoidance-avoidance conflicts.\",\"authors\":\"Ariel Levy, Maya Enisman, Anat Perry, Tali Kleiman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scan/nsad038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The seminal theory of motivational conflicts distinguishes between approach-approach (AP-AP) conflicts, in which a decision is made between desirable alternatives, and avoidance-avoidance (AV-AV) conflicts, in which a decision is made between undesirable alternatives. The behavioral differences between AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are well documented: abundant research showed that AV-AV conflicts are more difficult to resolve than AP-AP ones. However, there is little to no research looking into the neural underpinnings of the differences between the two conflict types. Here, we show that midfrontal theta, an established neural marker of conflict, distinguished between the two conflict types such that midfrontal theta power was higher in AV-AV conflicts than in AP-AP conflicts. We further demonstrate that higher midfrontal theta power was associated with shorter decision times on a single-trial basis, indicating that midfrontal theta played a role in promoting successful controlled behavior. Taken together, our results show that AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are distinguishable on the neural level. The implications of these results go beyond motivational conflicts, as they establish midfrontal theta as a measure of the continuous degree of conflict in subjective decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10411683/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsad038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsad038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

动机冲突的开创性理论将冲突区分为接近-接近(AP-AP)冲突和回避-回避(AV-AV)冲突,前者是在理想选择之间做出决定,后者是在不理想选择之间做出决定。AP-AP 冲突和 AV-AV 冲突之间的行为差异有据可查:大量研究表明,AV-AV 冲突比 AP-AP 冲突更难解决。然而,有关这两种冲突类型之间差异的神经基础的研究却少之又少。在这里,我们发现中额θ是冲突的神经标记,它能区分两种冲突类型,即中额θ力量在AV-AV冲突中高于AP-AP冲突。我们进一步证明,较高的中额θ功率与较短的单次试验决策时间相关,这表明中额θ在促进成功控制行为方面发挥了作用。综上所述,我们的研究结果表明,AP-AP 冲突和 AV-AV 冲突在神经水平上是可以区分的。这些结果的意义超出了动机冲突的范畴,因为它们将中额θ确立为衡量主观决策中连续冲突程度的指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Midfrontal theta as an index of conflict strength in approach-approach vs avoidance-avoidance conflicts.

The seminal theory of motivational conflicts distinguishes between approach-approach (AP-AP) conflicts, in which a decision is made between desirable alternatives, and avoidance-avoidance (AV-AV) conflicts, in which a decision is made between undesirable alternatives. The behavioral differences between AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are well documented: abundant research showed that AV-AV conflicts are more difficult to resolve than AP-AP ones. However, there is little to no research looking into the neural underpinnings of the differences between the two conflict types. Here, we show that midfrontal theta, an established neural marker of conflict, distinguished between the two conflict types such that midfrontal theta power was higher in AV-AV conflicts than in AP-AP conflicts. We further demonstrate that higher midfrontal theta power was associated with shorter decision times on a single-trial basis, indicating that midfrontal theta played a role in promoting successful controlled behavior. Taken together, our results show that AP-AP and AV-AV conflicts are distinguishable on the neural level. The implications of these results go beyond motivational conflicts, as they establish midfrontal theta as a measure of the continuous degree of conflict in subjective decisions.

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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
62
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: SCAN will consider research that uses neuroimaging (fMRI, MRI, PET, EEG, MEG), neuropsychological patient studies, animal lesion studies, single-cell recording, pharmacological perturbation, and transcranial magnetic stimulation. SCAN will also consider submissions that examine the mediational role of neural processes in linking social phenomena to physiological, neuroendocrine, immunological, developmental, and genetic processes. Additionally, SCAN will publish papers that address issues of mental and physical health as they relate to social and affective processes (e.g., autism, anxiety disorders, depression, stress, effects of child rearing) as long as cognitive neuroscience methods are used.
期刊最新文献
The role of the Somatosensory system in the feeling of emotions: a neurostimulation study Increased sensitivity to social hierarchy during social competition versus cooperation Exposure to Community Violence as a Mechanism Linking Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Neural Responses to Reward The SocialVidStim: a video database of positive and negative social evaluation stimuli for use in social cognitive neuroscience paradigms Disrupted cognitive and affective empathy network interactions in autistic children viewing social animation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1