Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception

Abstract Minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure are conflicting motivations when pain and reward co-occur. Decisions to prioritize reward consumption or pain avoidance are assumed to lead to pain inhibition or facilitation, respectively. Such decisions are a function of the subjective utility of th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Susanne Becker, Wiebke Gandhi, Yan Jun Chen, Petra Schweinhardt
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Publishing Group 2017-08-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08454-4
id doaj-3d0cdc7cbbe34fb9ba80c4cec01fe96b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3d0cdc7cbbe34fb9ba80c4cec01fe96b2020-12-08T03:15:47ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222017-08-017111010.1038/s41598-017-08454-4Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perceptionSusanne Becker0Wiebke Gandhi1Yan Jun Chen2Petra Schweinhardt3Alan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill UniversityAlan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill UniversityAlan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill UniversityAlan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill UniversityAbstract Minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure are conflicting motivations when pain and reward co-occur. Decisions to prioritize reward consumption or pain avoidance are assumed to lead to pain inhibition or facilitation, respectively. Such decisions are a function of the subjective utility of the stimuli involved, i.e. the relative value assigned to the stimuli to compare the potential outcomes of a decision. To test perceptual pain modulation by varying degrees of motivational conflicts and the role of subjective utility, we implemented a task in which healthy volunteers had to decide between accepting a reward at the cost of receiving a nociceptive electrocutaneous stimulus or rejecting both. Subjective utility of the stimuli was assessed by a matching task between the stimuli. Accepting reward coupled to a nociceptive stimulus resulted in decreased perceived intensity, while rejecting the reward to avoid pain resulted in increased perceived intensity, but in both cases only if a high motivational conflict was present. Subjective utility of the stimuli involved moderated these bidirectional perceptual effects: the more a person valued money over pain, the more perceived intensity increased or decreased. These findings demonstrate pain modulation when pain and reward are simultaneously present and highlight the importance of subjective utility for such modulation.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08454-4
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Susanne Becker
Wiebke Gandhi
Yan Jun Chen
Petra Schweinhardt
spellingShingle Susanne Becker
Wiebke Gandhi
Yan Jun Chen
Petra Schweinhardt
Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
Scientific Reports
author_facet Susanne Becker
Wiebke Gandhi
Yan Jun Chen
Petra Schweinhardt
author_sort Susanne Becker
title Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
title_short Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
title_full Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
title_fullStr Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
title_full_unstemmed Subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
title_sort subjective utility moderates bidirectional effects of conflicting motivations on pain perception
publisher Nature Publishing Group
series Scientific Reports
issn 2045-2322
publishDate 2017-08-01
description Abstract Minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure are conflicting motivations when pain and reward co-occur. Decisions to prioritize reward consumption or pain avoidance are assumed to lead to pain inhibition or facilitation, respectively. Such decisions are a function of the subjective utility of the stimuli involved, i.e. the relative value assigned to the stimuli to compare the potential outcomes of a decision. To test perceptual pain modulation by varying degrees of motivational conflicts and the role of subjective utility, we implemented a task in which healthy volunteers had to decide between accepting a reward at the cost of receiving a nociceptive electrocutaneous stimulus or rejecting both. Subjective utility of the stimuli was assessed by a matching task between the stimuli. Accepting reward coupled to a nociceptive stimulus resulted in decreased perceived intensity, while rejecting the reward to avoid pain resulted in increased perceived intensity, but in both cases only if a high motivational conflict was present. Subjective utility of the stimuli involved moderated these bidirectional perceptual effects: the more a person valued money over pain, the more perceived intensity increased or decreased. These findings demonstrate pain modulation when pain and reward are simultaneously present and highlight the importance of subjective utility for such modulation.
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08454-4
work_keys_str_mv AT susannebecker subjectiveutilitymoderatesbidirectionaleffectsofconflictingmotivationsonpainperception
AT wiebkegandhi subjectiveutilitymoderatesbidirectionaleffectsofconflictingmotivationsonpainperception
AT yanjunchen subjectiveutilitymoderatesbidirectionaleffectsofconflictingmotivationsonpainperception
AT petraschweinhardt subjectiveutilitymoderatesbidirectionaleffectsofconflictingmotivationsonpainperception
_version_ 1724392702987993088