The incentive sensitization theory of addiction proposes that through repeated associations with addictive rewards, addiction-related stimuli acquire a disproportionately powerful motivational pull on behaviour. 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 has been little studied. Here, we examined whether sign- and goal-tracking in healthy human volunteers modulates the effects of reward-paired cues on cost-benefit 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 two-choice lottery 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, and both studies yielded evidence of goal-tracking being associated with greater risk-promoting effects of cues. 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.
Impacts of inter-trial interval duration on a computational model of sign-tracking vs. goal-tracking behaviour
