Reactivation of pain-related patterns in the hippocampus from single past episodes relates to successful memory-based decision making
Wimmer, G. E.; Buechel, C.
Show abstract
Aversive and rewarding experiences can exert a strong influence on subsequent behavior. While decisions are often supported by the value of single past episodes, most research has focused on the role of well-learned value associations. Recent studies have begun to investigate the influence of reward-associated episodes, but it is unclear if these results generalize to negative experiences such as pain. To investigate whether and how the value of previous aversive experiences modulates behavior and brain activity, in our experiments female and male human participants experienced episodes of high or low pain in conjunction with incidental, trial-unique neutral pictures. In an incentive-compatible surprise test phase, we found that participants avoided pain-paired objects. In a separate fMRI experiment, at test, participants exhibited significant pain value memory. Neurally, when participants were re-exposed to pain-paired objects, we found no evidence for reactivation of pain-related patterns in pain-responsive regions such as the anterior insula. Critically, however, we found significant reactivation of pain-related patterns of activity in the hippocampus, such that activity significantly discriminated high versus low pain episodes. Further, stronger reactivation in the anterior hippocampus was related to improved pain value memory performance. Our results demonstrate that single incidental aversive experiences can build memories that affect decision making and that this influence may be supported by the hippocampus. Significance StatementAversive and rewarding experiences can exert a strong influence on our subsequent behavior. While decisions are often supported by single past negative or positive episodes, most research has focused on the role of well-learned value associations. In experiments using aversive heat pain in conjunction with incidental objects, we found that participants choices were biased by the level of pain associated with the objects. Further, when participants saw the objects again, pain-related neural patterns in the hippocampus were re-expressed and this was related to pain value memory performance. These results suggest a mechanism by which even single negative experiences can guide our later decisions.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Domain-general neural effects of associative learning and expectations on pain and hedonic taste perception 96%
- Rewarded extinction increases amygdalar connectivity and stabilizes long-term memory traces in the vmPFC 94%
- Differential contributions of ventral striatum subregions to the motivational and hedonic components of the affective processing of the reward 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Instructions and experiential learning have similar impacts on pain and pain-related brain responses but produce dissociations in value-based reversal learning 98%
- The neural dynamics of positive and negative expectations of pain 95%
- Cortico-spinal coupling along descending pain system differentiates between opioid and saline treatment in healthy participants 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Pain reflects the informational value of nociceptive inputs. 95%
- Baseline Resting-State Functional Connectivity Determines Subsequent Pain Ratings to a Tonic Ecologically Valid Experimental Model of Orofacial Pain 94%
- Assessing the predictive value of peak alpha frequency for the sensitivity to pain 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Neural mechanisms of costly helping in the general population and mirror-pain synesthetes 95%
- Fear in the mind's eye: Mental imagery can generate and regulate acquired differential fear conditioned reactivity 94%
- Corticotropin-Releasing Factor Neurons in the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis Differentially Influence Pain Processing and Modulation in Male and Female Mice 93%
"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.