4.8 Article

Nucleus accumbens dopamine tracks aversive stimulus duration and prediction but not value or prediction error

Journal

ELIFE
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

eLIFE SCIENCES PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.82711

Keywords

dopamine; prediction error; nucleus accumbens; aversive stimuli; motivation; behavior; Rat

Categories

Funding

  1. European Research Council
  2. Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek [ERC-2014-STG 638013]
  3. [VIDI 864.14.010]
  4. [2015/06367/ALW]
  5. [BRAINSCAPES 024.004.012]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study systematically investigates the role of dopamine in processing aversive stimuli and finds that NAC dopamine primarily tracks the prediction and duration of aversive events, rather than aversive prediction errors.
There is active debate on the role of dopamine in processing aversive stimuli, where inferred roles range from no involvement at all, to signaling an aversive prediction error (APE). Here, we systematically investigate dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens core (NAC), which is closely linked to reward prediction errors, in rats exposed to white noise (WN, a versatile, underutilized, aversive stimulus) and its predictive cues. Both induced a negative dopamine ramp, followed by slow signal recovery upon stimulus cessation. In contrast to reward conditioning, this dopamine signal was unaffected by WN value, context valence, or probabilistic contingencies, and the WN dopamine response shifted only partially toward its predictive cue. However, unpredicted WN provoked slower post-stimulus signal recovery than predicted WN. Despite differing signal qualities, dopamine responses to simultaneous presentation of rewarding and aversive stimuli were additive. Together, our findings demonstrate that instead of an APE, NAC dopamine primarily tracks prediction and duration of aversive events.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available