Search results

Many psychologists posit that intrinsic motivation generated by personal interest and spontaneous satisfactions is qualitatively different from extrinsic motivation generated by external rewards. However, the contemporary neural understanding of human motivation has been developed almost exclusively based on the neural mechanisms of extrinsic motivation. In neuroscience studies on extrinsic motivation, striatum activity has been consistently observed as the core neural system related to human motivation. Recently, a few studies have started examining the neural system behind intrinsic motivation. Though these studies have found that striatum activity is crucial for the generation of intrinsic motivation, the unique neural basis of intrinsic motivation has not yet been fully identified. I suggest that insular cortex activity, known to be related to intrinsic enjoyment and satisfaction, is a unique neural component of intrinsic motivation. In this chapter, I addressed the theoretical background to and empirical evidence for this postulation.

Performance feedback about whether responses are correct or incorrect provides valuable information to help guide learning. Although feedback itself has no extrinsic value, it can produce subjective feelings similar to “rewards” and “punishments.” Therefore, feedback can play both an informative and a motivational role. Over the past decade, researchers have identified a neural circuit that processes reward value and promotes reinforcement learning, involving target regions of dopaminergic input (e.g., striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex). Importantly, this circuit is engaged by performance feedback even in the absence of reward. Recent research suggests that feedback-related brain activity can be modulated by motivational context, such as whether feedback reflects goal achievement, whether learners are oriented toward the informative versus evaluative aspect of feedback, and whether individual learners are motivated to perform well relative to their peers. This body of research suggests that the brain responds flexibly to feedback, based on the learner’s goals.

The rapid progress of neuroscience and the interdisciplinary collaboration between neuroscience and psychology have begun to provide valuable insights for understanding the dynamic and implicit nature of human motivation by identifying the in vivo neural mechanism of motivation. One of the fundamental questions in the field of the neuroscience of motivation is what neural mechanisms underlie the direction, intensity, and guidance of our motivation and subsequent actions. This prologue explains how neuroscience can contribute to the understanding of human motivation. To accomplish this purpose, we present what neuroscientific data look like, identify 13 key motivation-relevant brain structures, and introduce 3 key motivation-centric brain circuits – namely, the reward circuit, the value-based decision-making pathway, and the self-regulation/self-control network.

Purpose – Initial explorations in the burgeoning field of neuroeconomics have highlighted evidence supporting a potential dissociation between a fast automatic system and a slow deliberative controlled system. Growing research in the role of emotion in decision-making has attempted to draw parallels to the automatic system. This chapter will discuss a theoretical framework for understanding the role of emotion in decision-making and evidence supporting the underlying neural substrates.

Design/Methodology/Approach – This chapter applies a conceptual framework to understanding the role of emotion in decision-making, and emphasizes a distinction between expected and immediate emotions. Expected emotions refer to anticipated emotional states associated with a given decision that are never actually experienced. Immediate emotions, however, are experienced at the time of decision, and either can occur in response to a particular decision or merely as a result of a transitory fluctuation. This chapter will review research from the neuroeconomics literature that supports a neural dissociation between these two classes of emotion and also discuss a few interpretive caveats.

Findings – Several lines of research including regret, uncertainty, social decision-making, and moral decision-making have yielded evidence consistent with our formulization – expected and immediate emotions may invoke dissociable neural systems.

Originality/value – This chapter provides a more specific conceptualization of the mediating role of emotions in the decision-making process, which has important implications for understanding the interacting neural systems underlying the interface between emotion and cognition – a topic of immediate value to anyone investigating topics within the context of social-cognitive-affective-neuroscience.

Purpose – We summarize three previous neuroeconomic studies with two features that distinguish them from most others in experimental economics: (1) the use of physical pain to induce incentives and (2) acquisition of data on brain activation levels. By correlating behavior when payoffs are painful with brain activation, we are able to test for the neurobiological relevance of important phenomena previously observed in experimental studies that are at odds with classical economic theories of decision-making. These specific phenomena are (a) negative discounting of future payoffs; (b) nonlinear probability weighting; (c) the experience of regret and rejoice when making a decision under risk.

Methodology/approach – The expectation of pain is created through the use of mild electric shocks to the top of the foot. Pain confers disutility, so decisions are made in the domain of losses relative to the status quo. Simultaneous with these decisions, brain activation data is acquired through functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

Findings – We find evidence for negative time discounting of electric shocks. Participants who exhibited the most extreme forms of this discounting were distinguished by early and robust activation of a subset of the cortical pain matrix. We also find evidence for probability weighting in the domain of electric shocks, which is manifest at the neural level. We find evidence both behaviorally and neurally for regret and rejoice functions for painful outcomes.

Originality/value of chapter – Previous experimental economic studies in the domain of losses have typically used monetary rewards. Here, we report behavioral effects and neural correlates using pain.

Purpose – This chapter offers an integrative review of psychological and neurobiological differences between younger and older adults that might impact economic behavior. Focusing on key health economic challenges facing the elderly, it offers perspectives on how these psychological and neurobiological factors may influence decision-making over the life course and considers future interdisciplinary research directions.

Methodology/approach – We review relevant literature from three domains that are essential for developing a comprehensive science of decision-making and economic behavior in aging (psychology, neuroscience, and economics), consider implications for prescription drug coverage and long-term care (LTC) insurance, and highlight future research directions.

Findings – Older adults face many complex economic decisions that directly affect their health and well-being, including LTC insurance, prescription drug plans, and end of life care. Economic research suggests that many older Americans are not making cost-effective and economically rational decisions. While economic models provide insight into some of the financial incentives associated with these decisions, they typically do not consider the roles of cognition and affect in decision-making. Research has established that older age is associated with predictable declines in many cognitive functions and evidence is accumulating that distinct social motives and affect-processing profiles emerge in older age. It is unknown how these age differences impact the economic behaviors of older people and implies opportunities for path-breaking interdisciplinary research.

Originality/value of the chapter – Our chapter looks to develop interdisciplinary research to better understand the causes and consequences of age-related changes in economic decision-making and guide interventions to improve public programs and overall social welfare.

Purpose – The aim of the chapter is to show how two important facts of physicians’ behavior, (i) their tendency to “create” the demand for medical practices, and (ii) their delay and reluctance in using new treatments and therapies, can be explained with the lens of the neuroeconomics research on the neural and behavioral basis of regret.

Methodology – This chapter adopts a neuroeconomics perspective on decision-making, asking how the brain represents values and generates emotional states, which consequently influence choices. In the line of recent work on emotion-based decision-making, we expect to be able to characterize the brain areas underlying the studied processes and to specify the functional relationship between rational decision-making and the emotional influences that modulate these decisional processes.

Originality – Neurobiological approaches can contribute significantly to a better understanding of the cognitive and emotional underpinnings of medical decision-making, from how physicians might evaluate and anticipate the effect of alternative therapies, to how patients might anticipate future consequences of their health choice. This can explain some features of the doctor–patient relationship which are not consistent with simple maximization models.

Findings – Our findings suggest that physicians’ behavior can be often explained by regret avoidance. Likewise, they suggest that physicians play as actual agents when they make medical decisions that will affect the future well-being of their patients.

Research limitations – We limited our analysis to the potential role of anticipated regret; therefore, this chapter neglects many important factors of the health sector.