4.4 Article

Motor cortical thickness is related to effort-based decision-making in humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 123, 期 6, 页码 2373-2381

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00118.2020

关键词

decision-making; effort; motor cortex

资金

  1. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health [K12 HD-073945, R01 HD-097619]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health [R56 MH-113627, R01 MH119086]
  3. National Institutes of Health [P41 EB-051909]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although motor cortex is integral in driving physical exertion, how its inherent properties influence decisions to exert is unknown. In this study, we examined how anatomical properties of motor cortex are related to participants' subjective valuations of effort and their decisions to exert effort. We used computational modeling to characterize participants' subjective valuation of physical effort during an effort-based decision-making task in which they made choices about exerting different levels of hand-grip exertion. We also acquired structural MRI data from these participants and extracted anatomical measures of each individual's hand knob, the region of motor cortex recruited during hand-grip exertion. We found that individual participants' cortical thickness of hand knob was associated with their effort-based decisions regarding hand exertion. These data provide evidence that the anatomy of an individual's motor cortex is an important factor in decisions to engage in physical activity. NEW & NOTEWORTHY How effortful a task feels is an integral aspect of human decision-making that influences choices to engage in physical activity. We show that properties of motor cortex (the brain region responsible for physical exertion) are related to assessments of effort and decisions to exert. These findings provide a link between the anatomical properties of motor cortex and the cognitive function of effort-based choice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据