Punishment insensitivity emerges from impaired contingency detection, not aversion insensitivity or reward dominance

Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel, P; Ma, C; Bradfield, LA; Killcross, S; McNally, GP

Punishment insensitivity emerges from impaired contingency detection, not aversion insensitivity or reward dominance

Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel, P

Ma, C Bradfield, LA

Killcross, S McNally, GP

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: eLife, 2019, 8
Issue Date:: 2019-11-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published VersionAdobe PDF (1.95 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel, P https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0898-8987	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Ma, C	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Bradfield, LA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3921-0745	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Killcross, S	en_US
dc.contributor.author	McNally, GP https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9061-6463	en_US
dc.date.available	2019-11-21	en_US
dc.date.issued	2019-11-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	eLife, 2019, 8	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/137158
dc.description.abstract	© 2019, eLife Sciences Publications Ltd. All rights reserved. Our behaviour is shaped by its consequences – we seek rewards and avoid harm. It has been reported that individuals vary markedly in their avoidance of detrimental consequences, i.e. in their sensitivity to punishment. The underpinnings of this variability are poorly understood; they may be driven by differences in aversion sensitivity, motivation for reward, and/or instrumental control. We examined these hypotheses by applying several analysis strategies to the behaviour of rats (n = 48; 18 female) trained in a conditioned punishment task that permitted concurrent assessment of punishment, reward-seeking, and Pavlovian fear. We show that punishment insensitivity is a unique phenotype, unrelated to differences in reward-seeking and Pavlovian fear, and due to a failure of instrumental control. Subjects insensitive to punishment are afraid of aversive events, they are simply unable to change their behaviour to avoid them.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	eLife	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.7554/eLife.52765	en_US
dc.title	Punishment insensitivity emerges from impaired contingency detection, not aversion insensitivity or reward dominance	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	8	en_US
utslib.for	0601 Biochemistry and Cell Biology	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science/School of Life Sciences
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	8	en_US

Abstract:

© 2019, eLife Sciences Publications Ltd. All rights reserved. Our behaviour is shaped by its consequences – we seek rewards and avoid harm. It has been reported that individuals vary markedly in their avoidance of detrimental consequences, i.e. in their sensitivity to punishment. The underpinnings of this variability are poorly understood; they may be driven by differences in aversion sensitivity, motivation for reward, and/or instrumental control. We examined these hypotheses by applying several analysis strategies to the behaviour of rats (n = 48; 18 female) trained in a conditioned punishment task that permitted concurrent assessment of punishment, reward-seeking, and Pavlovian fear. We show that punishment insensitivity is a unique phenotype, unrelated to differences in reward-seeking and Pavlovian fear, and due to a failure of instrumental control. Subjects insensitive to punishment are afraid of aversive events, they are simply unable to change their behaviour to avoid them.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/137158