Feedback and reward processing in high-functioning autism

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.11.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Individuals with high-functioning autism often display deficits in social interactions and high-level cognitive functions. Such deficits may be influenced by poor ability to process feedback and rewards. The feedback-related negativity (FRN) is an event-related potential (ERP) that is more negative following losses than gains. We examined FRN amplitude in 25 individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and 25 age- and IQ-matched typically developing control participants who completed a guessing task with monetary loss/gain feedback. Both groups demonstrated a robust FRN that was more negative to loss trials than gain trials; however, groups did not differ in FRN amplitude as a function of gain or loss trials. N1 and P300 amplitudes did not differentiate groups. FRN amplitude was positively correlated with age in individuals with ASD, but not measures of intelligence, anxiety, behavioral inhibition, or autism severity. Given previous findings of reduced-amplitude error-related negativity (ERN) in ASD, we propose that individuals with ASD may process external, concrete, feedback similar to typically developing individuals, but have difficulty with internal, more abstract, regulation of performance.

Introduction

Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) frequently display social, cognitive, and behavioral deficits that result from the consequences of atypical brain development and altered interactions with the environment. Several studies of the cognitive associations of social dysfunction in individuals diagnosed with ASD report limitations in the ability to process social stimuli, feedback, and reward. For example, Dawson et al. (2001) found that poor performance in individuals with ASD on a delayed non-matching to sample task appeared to arise from a difficulty in forming abstract stimulus–reward associations rather than deficits in visual object recognition. Ingersoll et al. (2003) found that young children diagnosed with autism better imitated the use of toys that were associated with concrete sensory feedback than abstract social feedback. Such difficulties in feedback and reward processing are thought to be the result of dysfunction of the fronto-striatal reward system, which may place greater emphasis on cognitive rather than emotional aspects of feedback (Schmitz et al., 2008).

The neural underpinnings of feedback and reward processing can be measured using the feedback-related negativity (FRN) component of the scalp-recorded event-related potential (ERP). The FRN is a negative deflection in the ERP that occurs approximately 250 ms to 300 ms following the presentation of feedback and is more negative to losses or unexpected outcomes than gains or expected outcomes (e.g., Gehring and Willoughby, 2002, Holroyd et al., 2003, Hajcak et al., 2006). More broadly speaking, the FRN represents an electrophysiological reflection of whether a desired result has been achieved and may represent a mechanism for performance feedback-signaling for adjustments in behaviors when outcomes are not consistent with behaviors or expectations (Hajcak et al., 2006). Source localization studies of the FRN broadly implicate areas of the medial–frontal cortex, including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as the neural generator (Gehring and Willoughby, 2002, Holroyd and Coles, 2002, Ruchsow et al., 2002, Nieuwenhuis et al., 2005), although additional areas such as the posterior cingulate, superior frontal gyrus, fusiform gyrus, and superior temporal gyrus have also been identified (e.g., van Veen et al., 2004, De Pascalis et al., 2010).

The FRN may be an important reflection of discrepancies between predicted and actual reward in the mesencephalic dopamine system. Dopaminergic activity in neurons connecting the basal ganglia and the ACC use reinforcement signals to promote feedback-based learning by processing negative events and determining suitable behavior for the given situation (Holroyd et al., 2003, Fein and Chang, 2008, Crowley et al., 2009). Disruption of the dopaminergic metabolism system involving the ACC, basal ganglia and prefrontal cortex may likewise contribute to behavioral deficits in ASD, by interfering with the ability to respond effectively to reward and punishment (Kendrick, 2004). Dopamine plays an important role in reward, sending error signals through neurons in the mesencephalic dopamine system to the ACC. These neurons aid in predicting the discrepancy between predicted and actual reward and are important in systems that code error and determine behavior (Holroyd et al., 2004, Crowley et al., 2009).

There is only one study published to date that relates to ASD and ERP components associated with feedback (Groen et al., 2008). Their study of a small sample (n = 17) of children diagnosed with subthreshold ASD did not show a typical FRN in individuals with ASD, individuals with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or typically developing (TD) children. However, they did find that ERPs associated with feedback anticipation and early feedback processing (e.g., the P2a waveform) did not reliably differ between TD children and those with subthreshold ASD. Groups did differ as a function of feedback valence on late P300 potentials associated with feedback processing. These differences possibly reflect an inability to integrate external error information into performance feedback (Groen et al., 2008). In addition, children with ASD showed greater anticipation for positive feedback throughout the task, in contrast to TD children. Overall, Groen et al. suggest that children with ASD may place greater significance on positive than negative feedback stimuli (see also Wilbarger et al., 2009); however, it is difficult to generalize from the results of this study as the FRN anticipated in their feedback task was not found and the sample consisted of individuals with subthreshold autism.

Several recent studies, including one conducted in our lab with an overlapping sample to those presented here, show reduced response amplitude on the error-related negativity (ERN) component of the ERP in individuals with ASD relative to controls (Vlamings et al., 2008, Sokhadze et al., 2010, South et al., 2010, Santesso et al., 2011). The ERN is an internal signal of error commission or conflict detection primarily found following errors on forced-choice reaction time tasks (see van Veen and Carter, 2006, for review). The ERN is reliably associated with emotional traits and processes, such as negative affect (Luu et al., 2000), anxiety and depression (Olvet and Hajcak, 2008), and even satisfaction with life (Larson et al., 2010). The FRN, on the other hand, is a reflection of more concrete processes and is based on external feedback that influences reinforcement-based learning and performance (Nieuwenhuis et al., 2004).

Prominent theories of the ERN and FRN suggest that these components both represent a reinforcement learning response to performance or feedback supported by the same mechanisms in the ACC (Holroyd and Coles, 2002). Studies directly comparing the two components, however, show mixed results. One study shows the ERN and FRN share a neural generator in the ACC, with an additional generator in the prefrontal cortex (Potts et al., 2011) and others showing nearly identical neural processes and generators (Heldmann et al., 2008, Gentsch et al., 2009). Regardless, studies suggest that these components are temporally dissociable, with one representing a response to concrete external feedback and the other representing an internally generated signal of a failure to reach expected outcomes (Gentsch et al., 2009).

The purpose of the present study was to examine the neural response to reward, as represented by the FRN, in individuals with ASD and typically developing controls. Our study adds to the previous study of the FRN in ASD conducted by Groen et al. (2008) by: a) using a task specifically intended to measure the FRN as a function of gains and losses; and, b) using a sample that meets stricter guidelines for ASD. Given performance monitoring and feedback decrements in individuals with autism, we hypothesized that individuals with ASD would show decreased-amplitude FRN values relative to healthy control participants.

Section snippets

Participants

All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at Brigham Young University. Initial study enrollment included 26 individuals with ASD and 25 typically developing control participants. Data from one outlier participant with ASD were excluded due to means more than two standard deviations below the group averages for the FRN. The final sample, therefore, included 25 individuals with ASD between the ages of 9 and 21 years (M = 13.89 years, S.D. = 2.46; two female) and 25 age- and

Response times

As expected, mean RTs did not differ between individuals with ASD and controls on loss trials, t(48) = 0.25, p = 0.80, d = 0.07, or gain trials, t(48) = 0.16, p = 0.88, d = 0.04, indicating groups did not respond more impulsively or differentially to loss or gain trials. Participants with ASD had a mean (± S.D.) RT of 1419.40 (604.49) for loss trials and 1503.18 (627.76) for gain trials; controls had a mean RT of 1461.43 (577.92) for loss trials and 1529.81 (575.45) for gain trials.

Event-related potential data

Similar to the RT data,

Discussion

We did not find significant differences in FRN amplitude between our sample of 25 individuals diagnosed with ASD compared to 25 age- and IQ-matched typically developing controls. Our results generally replicate the only previously published study of the FRN in ASD conducted by Groen et al. (2008), although our sample was diagnostically more severe and our task was utilized more specifically to elicit and analyze the FRN component of the ERP. That is, neither study found consistent group

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Oliver Johnston and Peter Clayson in data collection. This study was supported by funds from the Brigham Young University College of Family, Home, and Social Sciences.

References (53)

  • D.M. Olvet et al.

    The error-related negativity (ERN) and psychopathology: toward an endophenotype

    Clinical Psychology Review

    (2008)
  • M. Ruchsow et al.

    Human anterior cingulate cortex is activated by negative feedback: evidence from event-related potentials in a guessing task

    Neuroscience Letters

    (2002)
  • M. South et al.

    Error processing in high-functioning autism spectrum disorders

    Biological Psychology

    (2010)
  • L. van Leijenhorst et al.

    Neural correlates of developmental differences in risk estimation and feedback processing

    Neuropsychologia

    (2006)
  • V. van Veen et al.

    Errors without conflict: implications for performance monitoring theories of anterior cingulate cortex

    Brain and Cognition

    (2004)
  • J. Wilbarger et al.

    Startle modulation in autism: positive affective stimuli enhance startle response

    Neuropsychologia

    (2009)
  • M. Allen

    Decoding representations: how children with autism understand drawings

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (2009)
  • C. Blair et al.

    Physiological and neuropsychological correlates of approach/withdrawal tendencies in preschool: further examination of the behavioral inhibition system/behavioral activation system scales for young children

    Developmental Psychobiology

    (2004)
  • S.M. Carlson et al.

    Neural correlates of decision making on a gambling task

    Child Development

    (2009)
  • C. Corsello et al.

    Between a ROC and a hard place: decision making and making decisions using the SCQ

    Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

    (2007)
  • E.A. Crone et al.

    Development of decision making in school-aged children and adolescents: evidence from heart rate and skin conductance analysis

    Child Development

    (2007)
  • M.J. Crowley et al.

    Risk-taking and the feedback negativity response to loss among at-risk adolescents

    Developmental Neuroscience

    (2009)
  • G. Dawson et al.

    Recognition memory and stimulus-reward associations: indirect support for the role of ventromedial prefrontal cortex in autism

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (2001)
  • B. Eppinger et al.

    Developmental differences in learning and error processing: evidence from ERPs

    Psychophysiology

    (2009)
  • H. Garretson et al.

    Sustained attention in children with autism

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (1990)
  • H. Gastgeb et al.

    Prototype formation in autism: can individuals with autism abstract facial prototypes

    Autism Research

    (2009)
  • Cited by (75)

    • Abnormal negative feedback processing in individuals with autistic traits in the Iowa gambling task: Evidence from behavior and event-related potentials

      2021, International Journal of Psychophysiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Thus, the theta-band oscillations in the midfrontal cortex are a potentially reliable indicator of reward-related feedback utilization during decision-making processes (Pinner and Cavanagh, 2017). Measurements based on ERPs also provide evidence to help understand abnormal value-based decision making in individuals with ASD (Larson et al., 2011; Bellebaum et al., 2014; Stavropoulos and Carver, 2014). In particular, the variations in the FRN amplitude can be used as an electrophysiological maker related to function/dysfunction reward-related feedback processing in ASD in monetary reward or probabilistic learning tasks.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    These authors contributed equally and are considered co-first authors.

    View full text