scholarly journals Vicarious Trial-and-Error Is Enhanced During Deliberation in Human Virtual Navigation in a Translational Foraging Task

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thach Huynh ◽  
Keanan Alstatt ◽  
Samantha V. Abram ◽  
Neil Schmitzer-Torbert

Foraging tasks provide valuable insights into decision-making as animals decide how to allocate limited resources (such as time). In rodents, vicarious trial-and-error (back and forth movements), or VTE, is an important behavioral measure of deliberation which is enhanced early in learning and when animals are presented with difficult decisions. Using new translational versions of a rodent foraging task (the “Movie Row” and “Candy Row”), humans navigated a virtual maze presented on standard computers to obtain rewards (either short videos or candy) offered after a variable delay. Decision latencies were longer when participants were presented with difficult offers, overrode their preferences, and when they accepted an offer after rejecting a previous offer. In these situations, humans showed VTE-like behavior, where they were more likely to pause and/or reorient one or more times before making a decision. Behavior on these tasks replicated previous results from the rodent foraging task (“Restaurant Row”) and a human version lacking a navigation component (“Web-Surf”) and revealed some species differences. Compared to survey measures of delay-discounting, willingness to wait for rewards in the foraging task was not related to willingness to wait for hypothetical rewards. And, smoking status (use of cigarettes or e-cigarettes) was associated with stronger discounting of hypothetical future rewards, but was not well-related to performance on the foraging tasks. In contrast, individuals with overweight or obese BMI (≥25) did not show stronger delay-discounting, but individuals with BMI ≥ 25, and especially females, showed reduced sensitivity to sunk-costs (where their decisions were less sensitive to irrecoverable investments of effort) and less deliberation when presented with difficult offers. These data indicate that VTE is a behavioral index of deliberation in humans, and further support the Movie and Candy Row as translational tools to study decision-making in humans with the potential to provide novel insights about decision-making that are relevant to public health.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thach Huynh ◽  
Keanan Alstatt ◽  
Samantha Abram ◽  
Neil Schmitzer-Torbert

AbstractForaging tasks can provide valuable insights into decision-making, as animals choose how to allocate limited resources (such as time). In the “Restaurant Row” task, rodents move between several sites to obtain food rewards available after a variable delay, while in a translational version (the “Web-Surf”) lacking the navigation component, humans are offered short videos. Both tasks have provided novel insights into decision-making and have been applied to addiction vulnerability and the impact of drug exposure on decision-making. We tested new tasks (the “Movie Row” and “Candy Row”) which use virtual navigation to determine if the behavioral correlates of human decision-making are more broadly similar to those of rodents, and explored the relationship of task performance to smoking and obesity. Humans navigated a virtual maze presented on standard computers to obtain rewards (either short videos or candy) available after a variable delay. Behavior on the tasks replicated previous results for the Restaurant Row and Web-Surf. In conditions promoting deliberation, decision latency was elevated along with measures of vicarious trial-and-error (VTE), supporting VTE as a shared behavioral index of deliberation across species. Smoking status was not well-related to performance, while high BMI (> 25) individuals showed reduced sensitivity to a sunk-costs measure and stronger sensitivity to offer value for offers below the preferred delay. These data support the Movie and Candy Row as translational tools to study decision-making during foraging in humans, providing convergent results with a rodent navigation task and demonstrating the potential to provide novel insights relevant to public health.


2020 ◽  
Vol 174 ◽  
pp. 107276
Author(s):  
Seiichiro Amemiya ◽  
Maina Ishida ◽  
Natsuko Kubota ◽  
Takeshi Nishijima ◽  
Ichiro Kita

2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (6) ◽  
pp. 1981-2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandy Schmidt ◽  
Anneke A. Duin ◽  
A. David Redish

Current theories of deliberative decision making suggest that deliberative decisions arise from imagined simulations that require interactions between the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. In rodent navigation experiments, hippocampal theta sequences advance from the location of the rat ahead to the subsequent goal. To examine the role of the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) on the hippocampus, we disrupted the mPFC with DREADDs (designer receptors exclusively activated by designer drugs). Using the Restaurant Row foraging task, we found that mPFC disruption resulted in decreased vicarious trial and error behavior, reduced the number of theta sequences, and impaired theta sequences in hippocampus. mPFC disruption led to larger changes in the initiation of the hippocampal theta sequences that represent the current location of the rat rather than to the later portions that represent the future outcomes. These data suggest that the mPFC likely provides an important component to the initiation of deliberative sequences and provides support for an episodic-future thinking, working memory interpretation of deliberation. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and hippocampus interact during deliberative decision making. Disruption of the mPFC impaired hippocampal processes, including the local and nonlocal representations of space along each theta cycle and the initiation of hippocampal theta sequences, while sparing place cell firing characteristics and phase precession. mPFC disruption reduced the deliberative behavioral process vicarious trial and error and improved economic behaviors on this task.


Neuron ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 975-982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew E. Papale ◽  
Mark C. Zielinski ◽  
Loren M. Frank ◽  
Shantanu P. Jadhav ◽  
A. David Redish

Hippocampus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 643-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Bett ◽  
Lauren H. Murdoch ◽  
Emma R. Wood ◽  
Paul A. Dudchenko

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document