Nicotine abstinence moderates electrophysiological markers of salience to social reward
Poster No:
434
Submission Type:
Abstract Submission
Authors:
Xiao Liu1, Stephen Read1, Rael Cahn1
Institutions:
1University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
First Author:
Co-Author(s):
Introduction:
Nicotine use relapse is consistently predicted by exposure to peer network use. However, it is currently unclear how social reward is affected by chronic nicotine use and withdrawal. Reward processing can be dissociated into mechanisms governing anticipatory "wanting" and consummatory "liking" (Berridge et al., 2009). Anticipatory reward processing may be particularly impaired during nicotine withdrawal, such that natural rewards have reduced motivational value (Cook et al., 2015; Hughes et al., 2020). This study examined the electrophysiological response to social reward during nicotine abstinence, which has implications for maintaining cessation.
Methods:
This was a within-subjects event-related potential study that used a social incentive delay paradigm (see Figure 1; Ait Oumeziane, 2017). 29 adult daily nicotine users were recruited from the area around the University of Southern California (M(age) = 22.9, 44.8% female) and completed the task under two experimental conditions; 12-hour nicotine abstinence and nicotine use ad libitum with 32-channel EEG recording. BrainVision Analyzer (BrainVision Analyzer, 2021) was used for data preprocessing and visualization. We used a 2 (reward vs. neutral) x 2 (abstinent vs. non-abstinent) repeated measures design for the amplitude of three components in the anticipation period and a 3 (reward vs. no reward vs. neutral) x 2 (abstinent vs. non-abstinent) repeated measures design for three components computed during feedback. The components of interest were chosen to correspond with attentional and affective response to task stimuli. A continuous Morlet complex wavelet transform was performed to extract layers within delta and theta frequency bands during both anticipation and outcome periods, which encode reward liking and salience, respectively (Cavanagh, 2015; Kam et al., 2019). This study also investigated the impact of individual differences using self-reported variables of reward sensitivity and affect. Hypotheses and methods were registered prior to commencing data analysis and are available at https://osf.io/fwpkn.
Results:
Nicotine abstinence moderated the amplitude of cue-related P3 (p = .049, ηp² = .13), such that salience of the reward cue was significantly greater than the neutral cue in non-abstinence (Mdiff = .38, p = .014), but not abstinence (see Figure 2). No other significant effects of task stimuli or abstinence were found during anticipation. The amplitude of the three outcome components encoding salience and affective response to feedback were sensitive to task stimuli such that amplitude was heightened to reward vs. neutral and no reward outcomes, but not significantly affected by abstinence. Time-frequency analysis revealed that delta was also sensitive to task outcomes such that there was greater delta activity to reward feedback than neutral (Mdiff = 1.00) and no reward (Mdiff = .69; p < .001, ηp² = .51), but the effects of abstinence did not rise to significance. Theta activity during the outcome period trended greater in abstinence (p = .076, ηp² = .131) at the α = .10 level, specifically for frontal pole (Mdiff = 7.06, p = .055) and right hemisphere (Mdiff = 2.34, p = .064) electrodes.
·overhead and posterior view
Conclusions:
Short-term nicotine abstinence impaired the ability to modulate attention towards cues predicting natural rewards in the environment, but did not affect reward liking. Specifically, P3 did not elicit a detectable signal to reward cue in abstinence, which suggests impaired discriminability to environmental stimuli. Frontal theta was found to be enhanced to high-risk outcomes in healthy participants (Christie & Tata, 2009); this suggests heightened salience of feedback induced by abstinence. Therefore, individuals in cessation could benefit from behavioral activation therapies in the social domain to expand non-nicotine using peer networks. Further research is needed to extend these findings to individuals in recovery from other substance use disorders.
Disorders of the Nervous System:
Psychiatric (eg. Depression, Anxiety, Schizophrenia) 1
Emotion, Motivation and Social Neuroscience:
Reward and Punishment
Social Neuroscience Other
Modeling and Analysis Methods:
EEG/MEG Modeling and Analysis 2
Keywords:
Addictions
DISORDERS
Dopamine
Electroencephaolography (EEG)
Emotions
Psychiatric Disorders
Social Interactions
Other - reward
1|2Indicates the priority used for review
Abstract Information
By submitting your proposal, you grant permission for the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) to distribute your work in any format, including video, audio print and electronic text through OHBM OnDemand, social media channels, the OHBM website, or other electronic publications and media.
The Open Science Special Interest Group (OSSIG) is introducing a reproducibility challenge for OHBM 2025. This new initiative aims to enhance the reproducibility of scientific results and foster collaborations between labs. Teams will consist of a “source” party and a “reproducing” party, and will be evaluated on the success of their replication, the openness of the source work, and additional deliverables. Click here for more information. Propose your OHBM abstract(s) as source work for future OHBM meetings by selecting one of the following options:
Please indicate below if your study was a "resting state" or "task-activation” study.
Healthy subjects only or patients (note that patient studies may also involve healthy subjects):
Was this research conducted in the United States?
Are you Internal Review Board (IRB) certified? Please note: Failure to have IRB, if applicable will lead to automatic rejection of abstract.
Were any human subjects research approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board or ethics panel? NOTE: Any human subjects studies without IRB approval will be automatically rejected.
Were any animal research approved by the relevant IACUC or other animal research panel? NOTE: Any animal studies without IACUC approval will be automatically rejected.
Please indicate which methods were used in your research:
Provide references using APA citation style.
2. BrainVision Analyzer (Version 2.2.2). (2021). [Computer software]. Brain Products GmbH.
3. Cavanagh, J. F. (2015). Cortical delta activity reflects reward prediction error and related behavioral adjustments, but at different times. NeuroImage, 110, 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.007
4. Cook, J. W., Piper, M. E., Leventhal, A. M., Schlam, T. R., Fiore, M. C., & Baker, T. B. (2015). Anhedonia as a Component of the Tobacco Withdrawal Syndrome. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124(1), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000016
5. Hughes, J. R., Klemperer, E. M., & Peasley-Miklus, C. (2020). Possible New Symptoms of Tobacco Withdrawal II: Anhedonia-A Systematic Review. Nicotine & Tobacco Research: Official Journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 22(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/nty171
6. Kam, J. W. Y., Lin, J. J., Solbakk, A.-K., Endestad, T., Larsson, P. G., & Knight, R. T. (2019). Default network and frontoparietal control network theta connectivity supports internal attention. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(12), 1263–1270. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0717-0