Reward vs. aversion: false dichotomy

  • Thread starter Pythagorean
  • Start date
In summary, 14 physiology papers have favored the psychological/behavioral model over the physiological/computational model when it comes to representing reward and aversiveness. However, one paper by Skinner presents the behaviorism perspective which could be defended depending on how it is modeled by psychologists today. The author of the paper argues that dopamine neurons in the primate ventral midbrain are activated by evidence for reward but not sensitive to aversiveness, indicating that these two dimensions are represented independently. This suggests the existence of four types of value-sensitive neurons: reward-ON (dopamine), reward-OFF, aversive-ON, and aversive-OFF.
  • #1
Pythagorean
Gold Member
4,401
313
a refutation of an assumption in 14 physiology papers. Apparently, the psychological/behavioral model is favored and the physiological/computational model is oversimplified (that is, if you take these 14 papers to be representative). Skinner is the one reference representing psych/behavior perspective, that could be defensible depending on how this particular idea of behaviorism is actually modeled by psychologists today.

Whereas reward (appetitiveness) and aversiveness (punishment) have been distinguished as two discrete dimensions within psychology and behavior, physiological and computational models of their neural representation have treated them as opposite sides of a single continuous dimension of “value.” Here, I show that although dopamine neurons of the primate ventral midbrain are activated by evidence for reward and suppressed by evidence against reward, they are insensitive to aversiveness. This indicates that reward and aversiveness are represented independently as two dimensions, even by neurons that are closely related to motor function. Because theory and experiment support the existence of opponent neural representations for value, the present results imply four types of value-sensitive neurons corresponding to reward-ON (dopamine), reward-OFF, aversive-ON, and aversive-OFF.

http://www.sciencemag.org.proxy.lib.uwaterloo.ca/content/341/6145/546.full
Two Dimensions of Value: Dopamine Neurons Represent Reward But Not Aversiveness
Science 2 August 2013:
Vol. 341 no. 6145 pp. 546-549
DOI: 10.1126/science.1238699
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
The link is no longer working.
 
  • #3

1. What is a false dichotomy in the context of reward and aversion?

A false dichotomy, also known as a false dilemma, is a logical fallacy where two options are presented as the only possible choices, when in reality there may be other options or a combination of the two presented options. In the context of reward and aversion, it refers to the belief that all behaviors are motivated by either seeking rewards or avoiding aversive stimuli, when in fact there may be a combination of both motivations at play.

2. How is the concept of reward and aversion related to motivation?

Reward and aversion are both factors that can influence motivation. The promise of a reward can motivate individuals to engage in certain behaviors, while the threat of aversive consequences can motivate individuals to avoid certain behaviors. However, this is not a black and white distinction as both reward and aversion can work together to influence motivation.

3. Can reward and aversion coexist in the same situation?

Yes, reward and aversion can coexist in the same situation. For example, someone may be motivated to work hard and achieve success in order to receive a reward, but they may also be motivated to avoid failure and the potential negative consequences that come with it.

4. How can understanding the false dichotomy of reward and aversion benefit us?

By understanding that reward and aversion are not mutually exclusive, we can have a more nuanced understanding of motivation and behavior. This can help us better understand our own motivations and the motivations of others, and make more informed decisions in various situations.

5. Are there any real-life examples of the false dichotomy of reward and aversion?

One real-life example of the false dichotomy of reward and aversion is in the field of education. Many schools use a system of rewards (such as stickers or prizes) to motivate students to do well, while also using consequences (such as detention or loss of privileges) to discourage negative behavior. However, research has shown that intrinsic motivation, or the internal desire to engage in a behavior for its own sake, is a more effective and long-lasting motivator than the promise of rewards or the threat of aversive consequences alone.

Similar threads

Sifting the 3rd qtr QG papers
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
24
Views
7K
Big Bang Big Schmang, astronomical redshift is an artifact of distance
    • Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
2K
A review of dowsing: Evidence for and against
    • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
25K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top