4.6 Article

Modulation of cue-guided choices by transcranial direct current stimulation

期刊

CORTEX
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 124-137

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.01.004

关键词

Cue-guided choice; Lateral prefrontal cortex; Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer; tDCS

资金

  1. FLAG-ERA grant MoDeM by MIUR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to investigate the involvement of the lateral prefrontal cortex in human cue-guided choices, revealing a reduction in outcome-specific transfer with cathodal stimulation but no impact on general transfer, supporting the presence of at least two possible neural pathways underlying cue-guided choices.
Environmental cues may anticipate the availability of rewards, thus acting as a guide towards a specific choice (i.e., cue-guided choices). Despite the lateral prefrontal cortex having a critical role in using past learning and flexibly selecting relevant information to guide behavior, the literature on the neural basis of human cue-guided choice mainly focused on the subcortical brain structures implicated, while the specific role of cortical areas remained unclear. The present study aimed to provide causal evidence for the involvement of the lateral prefrontal cortex in two forms of human cue-guided choice, namely outcome-specific and general. To do this, 2 mA cathodal, anodal or sham trans cranial direct current stimulation was applied over the lateral prefrontal cortex (with the posterior parietal cortex serving as control region) in three separate groups performing a Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer task. Results showed, for the first time, a dissociation in the cortical structures involved in human cue-guided choice. Cathodal stimulation of the lateral prefrontal cortex reduced the outcome-specific transfer. In striking contrast, there was no influence on the general transfer. These results argue in favor of the presence of at least two possible neural pathways underlying cue-guided choices. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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