Motivation by potential gains and losses affects control processes via different mechanisms in the attentional...

Attentional control in demanding cognitive tasks can be improved by manipulating the motivational state. Motivation to obtain gains and motivation to avoid losses both usually result in faster reaction times and stronger activation in relevant brain areas such as the prefrontal cortex, but little is known about differences in the underlying neurocognitive mechanisms of these types of motivation in an attentional control context. In the present functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we tested whether potential gain and loss as motivating incentives lead to overlapping or distinct neural effects in the attentional network, and whether one of these conditions is more effective than the other. A Flanker task with word stimuli as targets and distracters was performed by 115 healthy participants. Using a mixed blocked and event-related design allowed us to investigate transient and sustained motivation-related effects. Participants could either gain money (potential gain) or avoid losing money (potential loss) in different task blocks. Participants showed a congruency effect with increased reaction times for incongruent compared to congruent trials. Potential gain led to generally faster responses compared to the neutral condition and to stronger improvements than potential loss. Potential loss also led to shorter response times compared to the neutral condition, but participants improved mainly during incongruent and not during congruent trials. The event-related fMRI data revealed a main effect of congruency with increased activity in the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and inferior frontal junction area (IFJ), the pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA), bilateral insula, intraparietal sulcus (IPS) and visual word form area (VWFA). While potential gain led to increased activity in a cluster of the IFJ and the VWFA only during incongruent trials, potential loss was linked to activity increases in these regions during incongruent and congruent trials. The block analysis revealed greater activity in gain and loss blocks compared to the neutral condition in most of these regions but no differences in the direct comparison of gain and loss blocks. These findings show that potential monetary gain and loss rely on different mechanisms: Gain was more effective in reducing the reaction time compared to potential loss. Brain data indicate that in the gain context attentional control is executed specifically in incongruent trials, whereas the loss context induces an unspecific increase of attentional control. These findings extend previous studies by providing evidence for diverging neural mechanisms for the effects of different types of motivation on attentional control, specifying the underlying activity patterns in task- and stimulus-related regions.