Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40623066›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2025

Reward expectation yields distinct effects on sensory processing and decision making in the human brain.

Ankita Sengupta, Devarajan Sridharan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ankita SenguptaCentre for Neuroscience, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India.
Devarajan SridharanCentre for Neuroscience, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India.ORCID 0000-0003-1998-9018

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reward expectation robustly guides both attention and decisions. Yet, whether common or distinct mechanisms mediate each of these processes remains unknown. Previous studies have often conflated the effect of reward expectation on sensory processing and decision-making because locations selected for sensory prioritization (sensitivity effects) were also prioritized for decisions (criterion effects). Here, we identify distinct forms of reward expectation that separably control spatial attention and decisional biases in human cortex. Sensitivity and criterion were independently modulated when expected rewards varied across locations ("space-specific") or choices ("choice-specific"), respectively. Only sensitivity, not criterion, modulations reflected a limited, conserved attentional resource. Established neural and physiological signatures of attention, including gain modulation of event-related potentials, alpha-band power lateralization, and eye-movement biases, were elicited only by space-specific reward modulation. By contrast, neural correlates of decisional biases, including pre-stimulus alpha power suppression, selectively accompanied choice-specific reward modulation. Attention-related neural markers predicted sensitivity modulation by space-specific reward expectation but not criterion modulation by choice-specific reward expectation, indicating their distinct underlying mechanisms. Our findings uncover fundamentally dissociable behavioral and neural underpinnings of reward expectation effects on sensory and decisional selection, with critical implications for understanding how reward, attention, and choice are linked in the human brain.

Indexed as

BrainDecision MakingRewardAdultAttentionChoice BehaviorElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsEye MovementsFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40623066
PMCPMC12251098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.