Different underlying mechanisms for high and low arousal in probabilistic learning in humans

Humans are uniquely capable of adapting to highly changing environments by updating relevant information and adjusting ongoing behaviour accordingly. Here we show how this ability, termed cognitive flexibility, is differentially modulated by high and low arousal fluctuations. We implemented a probabilistic reversal learning paradigm in healthy participants as they transitioned towards sleep or physical extenuation. The results revealed, in line with our pre-registered hypotheses, that low arousal leads to diminished behavioural performance through increased decision volatility, while performance decline under high arousal was attributed to increased perseverative behaviour. These findings provide evidence for distinct patterns of maladaptive decision-making on each side of the arousal inverted u-shaped curve, differentially affecting participants' ability to generate stable evidence-based strategies, and introduces wake-sleep and physical exercise transitions as complementary experimental models for investigating neural and cognitive dynamics.

Repeat trial and breath averaging: Recommendations for research of VO2 kinetics of exercise transitions to steady-state

Multiple-breath and multiple-trial averaging have been used extensively in research of oxygen uptake kinetics to steady-state. However, specific guidelines outlining correct levels of averaging have not been discussed. The aim of this study was to assess error differences using multiple-trial and multiple-breath averaging systems, and make recommendations for future VO2 kinetics research. Eight male subjects were recruited for this study. Following a maximal cycle test to ascertain each subject’s ventilation threshold, eight identical repetition cycling exercise bouts were administered. The bouts consisted of 6-minute at 85% of the subject’s ventilation threshold. Firstly, multiple-trial and multiple-breath data were processed using traditional methods. As well, data were fit using a mono-exponential model to derive tau. Data for all levels of multiple-trial and multiple-breath methods were compared to an 8-trial and 13-breath average, respectively. Reduction in error from the 3-trial average and a 3-breath average represented ∼68% and ∼70% of total error reduction, respectively. Tau tended to increase with increasing breath averaging and decrease with increasing trial averaging. There is negligible benefit to averaging more than 3 repeat trials in VO2 kinetics research. Breath averaging beyond 3-breaths artificially increases tau.