Key result
Perceived control enhances reward positivity and theta power during feedback processing versus computer choices.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to address the electrophysiological correlates underlying perceived control, exercised by choice, in feedback valence processing.
Perceived control during feedback processing magnifies reward signals for positive outcomes and increases the need for control for negative outcomes.
Highlights distinct neural effects of perceived control on feedback processing; leaves open translation to clinical decision-making or risk behaviors.
Perceived control is a fundamental psychological function that can either boost positive affect or buffer negative affect. The current study addressed the electrophysiological correlates underlying perceived control, as exercised by choice, in the processing of feedback valence. Thirty-six participants performed an EEG choice task during which they received positive or negative feedback following choices made either by themselves or by a computer. Perceived control resulted in an enhanced reward positivity for positive feedback but increased theta power for negative feedback. Further, perceived control led to greater feedback P3 amplitude and delta power, regardless of feedback valence. These results suggest functional heterogeneity of perceived control in feedback processing as diverse as magnifying the reward signal, enhancing the need for control and increasing the motivational salience of outcome irrespective of valence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2020) studied this question. Perceived control (choices made by participants) vs. Choices made by a computer was evaluated on Electrophysiological correlates (reward positivity, theta power, P3 amplitude, and delta power) during feedback processing. Perceived control enhanced reward positivity for positive feedback, increased theta power for negative feedback, and led to greater feedback P3 amplitude and delta power regardless of valence.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: