Back

Motor implementation of control and reward-based urgency regulation across impulsivity

Fumery, T.; Chaise, F.; Soille Hambye, A.; Fievez, F.; Lambert, J.; Vassiliadis, P.; Derosiere, G.; Duque, J.

2026-01-31 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.01.30.702817 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Everyday decisions unfold dynamically, with commitment shaped by a growing sense of urgency that can, when excessive, contribute to impulsive choices. Here we aimed at dissociating two modes of urgency regulation, control-driven (accuracy-oriented) and reward-driven (motivation-based), and asked whether their relative influence varies across individuals differing in impulsivity. We further investigated how these regulatory modes are implemented in the motor system, focusing on two modulatory effects: surround inhibition and broad modulation. Healthy participants, whose impulsivity was assessed with the UPPS urgency dimension, performed a modified Tokens task crossing control demands (low vs high control blocks) with motivational context (low vs high reward trials). In two separate sessions, single-pulse TMS was applied either over the hand motor representation to probe corticospinal excitability indexing surround inhibition, or over the leg representation to index broad modulations of motor activity. This design successfully dissociated the two regulatory modes: control-driven adjustments (across blocks) were most evident in less impulsive participants, whereas reward-driven adjustments (across trials) were most evident in more impulsive participants. Consistent with this dissociation, control-driven urgency regulation was associated with broad modulation of motor activity, whereas reward-driven urgency adjustments were associated with changes in surround inhibition. These motor signatures may serve as probes of the respective contributions of control- and reward-driven regulation even when they are not explicitly dissociated. Our findings suggest that impulsivity may not simply reflect "more urgency" but a different weighting of the influences that shape it during decision making, a hypothesis that can now be tested in clinical conditions.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
37.9%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.9%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
4
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 23%
3.1%
6
Progress in Neurobiology
41 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.6%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 32%
2.6%
8
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
119 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
9
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
62 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
10
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
11
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.8%
12
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
13
Neuropsychologia
77 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
14
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
15
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.7%
16
Cerebral Cortex Communications
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
17
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
18
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
19
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
20
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.3%
21
Cortex
102 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
22
Neuroscience
88 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
23
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.9%
24
Experimental Brain Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
25
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
26
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
27
Cerebral Cortex
357 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Brain Research
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.6%
30
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%