Disentangling the temporal signatures of conditioned pupil dilation: Distinct valence- and prediction-error-related components revealed by mega-analysis
Finke, J. B.; Schippers, A. M.; Schaechinger, H.; Klucken, T.
Show abstract
Pupil dilation offers a sensitive, non-invasive window into the neurocognitive processes supporting human associative learning. Yet, the field lacks consensus on how to quantify conditioned pupil responses, particularly which time intervals best serve as readouts. Moreover, it remains unresolved whether pupil dilation during learning reflects a unitary arousal signal or multiple (overlapping yet distinct) processes that unfold sequentially (e.g., cue valuation, uncertainty-driven attention, anticipation, prediction-error [PE] signaling). To address this, we conducted a large-scale individual-participant-data reanalysis (mega-analysis) of harmonized primary studies from our lab (K = 7 independent samples; total N = 385; 562 sessions), reprocessed through an identical pipeline, with systematic variation in outcome valence and modality. Temporal PCA of CS- and US-locked epochs yielded highly stable component structures across trials and studies, which carried dissociable information: An early (CS-locked) component selectively tracked appetitive value, distinguishing reward cues before aversive differentiation emerged. Later phases reflected differential conditioning across both valences, increasingly coupled to arousal toward US onset. Aversive learning was most specifically expressed in responses peaking around expected US delivery, which also predicted negative valence ratings. Two subsequent components captured unconditioned responding and its modulation by unexpected outcomes and omissions, consistent with unsigned PE signaling (amplified after aversive cues) and, later, positive PEs. Generalized additive mixed models largely converged with the PCA structure. Pupil dilation is therefore not a unitary marker of conditioning, but rather a high-resolution readout of sequential processes such as valuation, arousal/attention, and outcome updating, offering a promising framework for future computational models of learning.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Psychophysiological Evidence for Fear Extinction Learning via Mental Imagery 95%
- Trial-wise exposure to visual appetitive cues increases physiological arousal but not temporal discounting. 95%
- Sensory suppression and increased neuromodulation during actions disrupt memory encoding of unpredictable self-initiated stimuli 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Robust group- but limited individual-level (longitudinal) reliability and insights into cross-phases response prediction of conditioned fear 95%
- Unravelling the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying counterconditioning in humans 94%
- Reduced discrimination between signals of danger and safety but not overgeneralization is linked to exposure to childhood adversity in healthy adults 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Observed but Never Experienced - Vicarious Learning of Fear Under Ecological Conditions 94%
- Individual differences in fear acquisition: Multivariate analyses of different Emotional Negativity scales, physiological responding, subjective measures, and neural activation 94%
- Defensive freezing and its relation to approach-avoidance decision-making under threat 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Neural adaptation of cingulate and insular activity during delayed fear extinction: A replicable pattern across assessment sites and repeated measurements 95%
- State anxiety biases estimates of uncertainty during reward learning in volatile environments 94%
- Task-level value affects trial-level reward processing 94%
"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.