Choosing the best or avoiding the worst: complementary and opponent value signals in the human brain
Résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Whether the brain encodes the subjective value of pleasant and unpleasant situations via a single integrated circuit or through distinct pathways remains unresolved. It is also unclear how neural value signals guide choices when the context involves choosing the most favorable option or avoiding the most unfavorable one. To address these questions, we recorded intracerebral activity from 27 participants as they first rated pleasant and unpleasant scenarios and then made binary choices across all combinations of item domain (pleasant/unpleasant) and choice frame (choose best/worst). Ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) broadband gamma activity (BGA, 50–150 Hz) tracked the value of pleasant items during rating and pre-choice, correlating positively with the most pleasant item irrespective of choice frame. Similarly, anterior insula (aIns) BGA tracked the value of unpleasant items during rating and pre-choice, correlating negatively with the most unpleasant item irrespective of choice frame. The difference in relative value correlations between the vmPFC and aIns was larger for choices involving a conflict between item domain and choice frame, consistent with slower response times and choices less aligned with value differences in these trials. These findings reveal dissociable yet complementary neural systems for pleasant and unpleasant valuation and highlight how such signals may guide flexible decision-making across contexts.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Choosing the best or avoiding the worst: complementary and opponent value signals in the human brain
- Date Crossref
- 05/11/2025
- Éditeur
- openRxiv
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.