High stakes slow responding, but do not help overcome Pavlovian biases in humans

(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds. If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)

Click on image to view larger version.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Effect on RTs. (A) Distribution of RTs for high and low stakes. RTs are slower under high stakes. (B) RTs per cue condition. Participants show faster RTs for (correct) Go responses to Go cues than (incorrect) Go responses to NoGo cues. Also, they show faster RTs to Win cues than Avoid cues, indicative of Pavlovian biases in the form of invigoration under reward prospects and inhibition under threat of punishment. (C) Group-level (colored dot, 95%-CI) and individual-participant (gray dots) regression coefficients from a mixed-effects linear regression of RTs on required action, cue valence, and their interaction. (D) RTs per cue condition and stakes condition. RTs are significantly slower under high stakes in the Go-to-Win (G2W), Go-to-Avoid (G2A), and NoGo-to-Win (NG2W) conditions. (E) RTs per valence-action congruency and stakes condition. RTs after significantly slower under high compared to low stakes. This effect is significantly stronger for incongruent than congruent cue conditions. (F) Group-level and individual-participant regression coefficients from a mixed-effects linear regression of RTs on congruency, stakes, and their interaction.

This Article

  1. Learn. Mem. 31: