Humans and other animals approach reward and avoid punishment and pay attention to cues predicting these events. Such motivated behavior thus appears to be guided by value, which directs behavior towards or away from positively or negatively valenced outcomes. Moreover, it is facilitated by (top-down) salience, which enhances attention to behaviorally relevant learned cues predicting the occurrence of valenced outcomes. Using human neuroimaging, we recently separated value (ventral striatum, posterior ventromedial prefrontal cortex) from salience (anterior ventromedial cortex, occipital cortex) in the domain of liquid reward and punishment. Moreover, we investigated potential drivers of learned salience: the probability and uncertainty with which valenced and non-valenced outcomes occur. We find that the brain dissociates valenced from non-valenced probability and uncertainty, which indicates that reinforcement matters for the brain, in addition to information provided by probability and uncertainty alone, regardless of valence. Finally, we assessed learning signals (unsigned prediction errors) that may underpin the acquisition of salience. Particularly the insula appears to be central for this function, encoding a subjective salience prediction error, similarly at the time of positively and negatively valenced outcomes. However, it appears to employ domain-specific time constants, leading to stronger salience signals in the aversive than the appetitive domain at the time of cues. These findings explain why previous research associated the insula with both valence-independent salience processing and with preferential encoding of the aversive domain. More generally, the distinction of value and salience appears to provide a useful framework for capturing the neural basis of motivated behavior.

How does our brain rapidly determine if something is good or bad? How do we know our place within a social group? How do we know how to behave appropriately in dynamic environments with ever-changing conditions? The Tye Lab is interested in understanding how neural circuits important for driving positive and negative motivational valence (seeking pleasure or avoiding punishment) are anatomically, genetically and functionally arranged. We study the neural mechanisms that underlie a wide range of behaviors ranging from learned to innate, including social, feeding, reward-seeking and anxiety-related behaviors. We have also become interested in “social homeostasis” -- how our brains establish a preferred set-point for social contact, and how this maintains stability within a social group. How are these circuits interconnected with one another, and how are competing mechanisms orchestrated on a neural population level? We employ optogenetic, electrophysiological, electrochemical, pharmacological and imaging approaches to probe these circuits during behavior.

If the mind controls the brain, then there is free will and its corollaries, dignity and responsibility. You are king in your skull-sized kingdom and the architect of your destiny. If, on the other hand, the brain controls the mind, an incendiary conclusion follows: There can be no free will, no praise, no punishment and no purgatory. In this webinar, Professor George Paxinos will discuss his highly respected work on the construction of human and experimental animal brain atlases. He has discovered 94 brain regions, 64 homologies and published 58 books. His first book, The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates, is the most cited publication in neuroscience and, for three decades, the third most cited book in science. Professor Paxinos will also present his recently published novel, A River Divided, which was 21 years in the making. Neuroscience principles were used in the formation of charters, such as those related to the mind, soul, free will and consciousness. Environmental issues are at the heart of the novel, including the question of whether the brain is the right ‘size’ for survival. Professor Paxinos studied at Berkeley, McGill and Yale and is now Scientia Professor of Medical Sciences at Neuroscience Research Australia and The University of New South Wales in Sydney.

If the mind controls the brain, then there is FREE WILL and its corollaries, dignity and responsibility. You are king in your skull-sized kingdom and the architect of your destiny. If, on the other hand, the brain controls the mind, an incendiary conclusion follows: There can be no FREE WILL, no praise, no punishment and no purgatory. There will be a presentation of the speaker’s novel which, inter alia, is concerned with this question: 21 year in the making this is the first presentation of A River Divided (environmental genre)

Transient changes in dopamine activity in response to reward and punishment have been known to regulate reward-related learning. However, the cellular basis that detects the transient dopamine signaling has long been unclear. Using two-photon microscopy and optogenetics, I have shown that transient increases and decreases of dopamine modulate plasticity of dopamine D1 and D2 receptor-expressing cells in the nucleus accumbens, respectively. At the behavioral level, I characterized that these D1 and D2 cells cooperatively tune learning by generalization and discrimination learning. Interestingly, disturbance of the dopamine signaling impaired D2 cell plasticity and discrimination learning, which was analogous to salience misattribution seen in subjects with schizophrenia.

Drosophila can learn to associate odours with reward or punishment and the resulting memories direct odour-specific approach or avoidance behaviours. Recent progress has revealed a straightforward model for learning in which reinforcing dopaminergic neurons assign valence to odour representations in the neural ensemble of the mushroom bodies. Dopamine directed synaptic depression alters the route of odour-driven activity through the mushroom body output network. This circuit configuration and influence of internal state guide the expression of appropriate behaviour. Importantly, learned behaviour is flexible and can be updated as the fly accumulates additional experience. Our latest studies demonstrate that well-informed behaviour is guided by combining parallel conflicting and complementary memories of opposite valence.

Impulsivity and compulsivity are behavioural traits that underlie many aspects of decision-making and form the characteristic symptoms of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and Gambling Disorder (GD). The neural underpinnings of aspects of reward and avoidance learning under the expression of these traits and symptoms are only partially understood. " "The present study combined behavioural modelling and neuroimaging technique to examine brain activity associated with critical phases of reward and loss processing in OCD and GD. " "Forty-two healthy controls (HC), forty OCD and twenty-three GD participants were recruited in our study to complete a two-session reinforcement learning (RL) task featuring a “probability switch (PS)” with imaging scanning. Finally, 39 HC (20F/19M, 34 yrs +/- 9.47), 28 OCD (14F/14M, 32.11 yrs ±9.53) and 16 GD (4F/12M, 35.53yrs ± 12.20) were included with both behavioural and imaging data available. The functional imaging was conducted by using 3.0-T SIEMENS MAGNETOM Skyra syngo MR D13C at Monash Biomedical Imaging. Each volume compromised 34 coronal slices of 3 mm thickness with 2000 ms TR and 30 ms TE. A total of 479 volumes were acquired for each participant in each session in an interleaved-ascending manner. " " The standard Q-learning model was fitted to the observed behavioural data and the Bayesian model was used for the parameter estimation. Imaging analysis was conducted using SPM12 (Welcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom) in the Matlab (R2015b) environment. The pre-processing commenced with the slice timing, realignment, normalization to MNI space according to T1-weighted image and smoothing with a 8 mm Gaussian kernel. " " The frontostriatal brain circuit including the putamen and medial orbitofrontal (mOFC) were significantly more active in response to receiving reward and avoiding punishment compared to receiving an aversive outcome and missing reward at 0.001 with FWE correction at cluster level; While the right insula showed greater activation in response to missing rewards and receiving punishment. Compared to healthy participants, GD patients showed significantly lower activation in the left superior frontal and posterior cingulum at 0.001 for the gain omission. " " The reward prediction error (PE) signal was found positively correlated with the activation at several clusters expanding across cortical and subcortical region including the striatum, cingulate, bilateral insula, thalamus and superior frontal at 0.001 with FWE correction at cluster level. The GD patients showed a trend of decreased reward PE response in the right precentral extending to left posterior cingulate compared to controls at 0.05 with FWE correction. " " The aversive PE signal was negatively correlated with brain activity in regions including bilateral thalamus, hippocampus, insula and striatum at 0.001 with FWE correction. Compared with the control group, GD group showed an increased aversive PE activation in the cluster encompassing right thalamus and right hippocampus, and also the right middle frontal extending to the right anterior cingulum at 0.005 with FWE correction. " " Through the reversal learning task, the study provided a further support of the dissociable brain circuits for distinct phases of reward and avoidance learning. Also, the OCD and GD is characterised by aberrant patterns of reward and avoidance processing.

How does our brain rapidly determine if something is good or bad? How do we know our place within a social group? How do we know how to behave appropriately in dynamic environments with ever-changing conditions? The Tye Lab is interested in understanding how neural circuits important for driving positive and negative motivational valence (seeking pleasure or avoiding punishment) are anatomically, genetically and functionally arranged. We study the neural mechanisms that underlie a wide range of behaviours ranging from learned to innate, including social, feeding, reward-seeking and anxiety-related behaviours. We have also become interested in “social homeostasis” -- how our brains establish a preferred set-point for social contact, and how this maintains stability within a social group. How are these circuits interconnected with one another, and how are competing mechanisms orchestrated on a neural population level? We employ optogenetic, electrophysiological, electrochemical, pharmacological and imaging approaches to probe these circuits during behaviour.