scholarly journals Motivational salience guides attention to valuable and threatening stimuli: Evidence from behaviour and fMRI

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haena Kim ◽  
Namrata Nanavaty ◽  
Humza Ahmed ◽  
Vani Mathur ◽  
Brian A. Anderson

Rewarding and aversive outcomes have opposing effects on behaviour, facilitating approach and avoidance, although we need to accurately anticipate each type of outcome in order to behave effectively. Attention is biased toward stimuli that have been learned to predict either type of outcome, and it remains an open question whether such orienting is driven by separate systems for value- and threat-based orienting or whether there exists a common underlying mechanism of attentional control driven by motivational salience. Here we provide a direct comparison of the neural correlates of value- and threat-based attentional capture following associative learning. Across multiple measures of behaviour and brain activation, our findings overwhelmingly support a motivational salience account of the control of attention. We conclude that there exists a core mechanism of experience-dependent attentional control driven by motivational salience, and that prior characterisations of attention as being value-driven or supporting threat monitoring need to be revisited.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Haena Kim ◽  
Namrata Nanavaty ◽  
Humza Ahmed ◽  
Vani A. Mathur ◽  
Brian A. Anderson

Abstract Rewarding and aversive outcomes have opposing effects on behavior, facilitating approach and avoidance, although we need to accurately anticipate each type of outcome to behave effectively. Attention is biased toward stimuli that have been learned to predict either type of outcome, and it remains an open question whether such orienting is driven by separate systems for value- and threat-based orienting or whether there exists a common underlying mechanism of attentional control driven by motivational salience. Here, we provide a direct comparison of the neural correlates of value- and threat-based attentional capture after associative learning. Across multiple measures of behavior and brain activation, our findings overwhelmingly support a motivational salience account of the control of attention. We conclude that there exists a core mechanism of experience-dependent attentional control driven by motivational salience and that prior characterizations of attention as being value driven or supporting threat monitoring need to be revisited.


2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 87-87
Author(s):  
K. Moore ◽  
E. Wiemers ◽  
S. Lee ◽  
C. Santos

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillary A Johnston-Cox ◽  
Barbara Corkey ◽  
Katya Ravid

The A2b adenosine receptor (A2bAR) is a G-protein coupled receptor that, upon binding of adenosine, activates adenylyl cyclase and mediates downstream effects through secondary messengers, including cyclic 3’5’ AMP (cAMP) and Ca ++ . We have previously demonstrated that A2bAR knockout (KO) KO mice, post-high fat diet (HFD) develop a type 2 diabetic (T2D) phenotype, evidenced by elevated plasma insulin and glucose. Pancreatic islets from A2bAR KO mice demonstrated insulin hypersecretion post-4 weeks HFD, and high glucose challenge. To further understand the underlying mechanism, we focused on the contribution of the pancreatic A2bAR to this phenomnena. cAMP has been demonstrated to be a significant amplifier of glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Through the use of A2bAR KO islets and diet-induced stress, we identified a new dual role for cAMP in mediating insulin secretion, dependent on cAMP level and duration. Short exposure to elevated cAMP indeed causes insulin hypersecretion. cAMP has, however, also a downregulating effect on the expression of GLUT2 mRNA and protein, which has the potential to inhibit insulin secretion. Thus, A2bAR short and long-term signaling in the pancreas play an important role in insulin homeostasis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth C. D. van der Stouwe ◽  
Jooske T. van Busschbach ◽  
Esther M. Opmeer ◽  
Bertine de Vries ◽  
Jan-Bernard C. Marsman ◽  
...  

Abstract Individuals with psychosis are at an increased risk of victimization. Processing of facial expressions has been suggested to be associated with victimization in this patient group. Especially processing of angry expressions may be relevant in the context of victimization. Therefore, differences in brain activation and connectivity between victimized and nonvictimized patients during processing of angry faces were investigated. Thirty-nine patients, of whom nineteen had experienced threats, assaults, or sexual violence in the past 5 years, underwent fMRI scanning, during which they viewed angry and neutral facial expressions. Using general linear model (GLM) analyses, generalized psychophysiological (gPPI) analysis and independent component analyses (ICA) differences in brain activation and connectivity between groups in response to angry faces were investigated. Whereas differences in regional brain activation GLM and gPPI analyses yielded no differences between groups, ICA revealed more deactivation of the sensorimotor network in victimized participants. Deactivation of the sensorimotor network in response to angry faces in victimized patients, might indicate a freeze reaction to threatening stimuli, previously observed in traumatized individuals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document