Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 3, 2026

A Conflict Model of Reward-seeking Behavior in Male Rats
Published on: February 20, 2019
Controllability Determines the Incentive Effect of Reward and Punishment: EEG Evidence
Yanru Zhan1, Fei Dong1, Yan Zhang1,2
1Beijing Key Laboratory of Learning and Cognition and School of Psychology, Capital Normal University, Beijing, China.
Abstract:
Although anticipating rewards and punishments facilitates behavioral performance, the role of controllability in shaping the integrative effects of these incentives remains unclear. To address this gap, we conducted two experiments using the Monetary Incentive Delay (MID) task and electroencephalography (EEG) recordings, aiming to investigate how controllability influences the effects of reward and punishment information on behavioral responses and their underlying neural mechanisms. In both experiments, the procedure followed a consistent structure: a cue indicating the reward and punishment condition was presented first, after which participants completed a task requiring fast and accurate responses, with feedback delivered afterward. In Experiment 1, reward delivery was contingent on participants' task performance, whereas punishment was delivered randomly. In contrast, Experiment 2 tied punishment delivery to performance, while reward was delivered randomly. Behaviorally, reaction times were significantly faster when participants anticipated controllable incentives-specifically, rewards in Experiment 1 and punishments in Experiment 2-without sacrificing response accuracy. For event-related potentials (ERPs), cue-related components (cue-N2, cue-P3, contingent negative variation [CNV], pre-feedback stimulus-preceding negativity [SPN]) showed consistent modulation by controllable incentives across both experiments. Additionally, the CNV was also influenced by uncontrollable rewards in Experiment 2. Results for the feedback-related negativity (FRN) and feedback-P3 consistently supported the salience prediction error account: outcomes involving reward (vs. no-reward) and punishment (vs. no-punishment) elicited more positive amplitudes. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that individuals are sensitive to both reward and punishment information, with heightened sensitivity to outcomes that are controllable, as reflected in both behavioral performance and neural activity.
Related Concept Videos
Operant Conditioning
Reinforcement in operant conditioning can be positive or negative, both of which serve to increase the likelihood of a behavior. Positive...
Incentive Theory: Pull Theory of Motivation
The theory differentiates between intrinsic and...
Timing and Consequences on Behavior
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...
Law of Effect
Edward Thorndike's foundational work involved studying learning in animals, particularly using puzzle boxes...
Self-Regulation
Punishment
Punishment can be positive or negative. Positive punishment involves adding an undesirable stimulus, such as scolding, to decrease a behavior. Negative punishment involves removing a desirable stimulus, such as taking away a favorite toy, to decrease behavior.

