Distinct striatal subregions and corticostriatal connectivity for effort, action and reward
Suzuki, S.; Lawlor, V. M.; Cooper, J. A.; Arulpragasam, A. R.; Treadway, M. T.
Show abstract
The ventral striatum is believed to encode the subjective value of cost/benefit options; however, this effect has strikingly been absent during choices that involve physical effort. Prior work in freely-moving animals has revealed opposing striatal signals, with greater response to increasing effort demands and reduced responses to rewards requiring effort. Yet, the relationship between these conflicting signals remains unknown. Using fMRI with a naturalistic, effort-based navigation paradigm, we identified functionally-segregated regions within ventral striatum that separately encoded action, effort, and discounting of rewards by effort. Strikingly, these sub-regions mirrored results from a large-sample connectivity-based parcellation of the striatum. Moreover, individual differences in striatal effort activation and effort discounting signals predicted striatal responses to effort-related choices during an independent fMRI task. Taken together, our results suggest that a dorsomedial region primarily associated with action may instead represent the effort cost of actions, and raises fundamental questions regarding the interpretation of striatal "reward" signals in the context of effort demands.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Neuro-computational account of arbitration between imitation and emulation during human observational learning 95%
- Behavioral, physiological, and neural signatures of surprise during naturalistic sports viewing 95%
- Entorhinal and ventromedial prefrontal cortices abstract and generalise the structure of reinforcement learning problems 95%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.