Current models of attention describe attention not as a homogenous entity but as a set of neural networks whose measurement yields a set of three endophenotypes—alerting, orienting, and executive control. Previous findings revealed different neuroanatomical regions for these subsystems, and data from twin studies indicate differences in their heritability. The present study investigated the molecular genetic basis of attention in a sample of 100 healthy subjects. Attention performance was assessed with the attention network test that distinguishes alerting, orienting, and executive control (conflict) using a simple reaction time paradigm with different cues and congruent and incongruent flankers. Two gene loci on candidate genes for cognitive functioning, the functional catechol- O -methyltransferase ( COMT ) VAL158MET and the tryptophan hydroxylase 2 ( TPH2 ) −703 G/T promoter polymorphism, were tested for possible associations with attention. COMT is involved in the catabolism of dopamine, and TPH is the rate-limiting enzyme for serotonin synthesis. Results showed no effect of the COMT polymorphism on attention performance. However, the TT genotype of TPH2 −03 G/T was significantly associated with more errors (a possible indicator of impaired impulse control; p = .001) and with decreased performance in executive control ( p = .001). This single-nucleotide polymorphism on the TPH2 gene explained more than 10% of the variance in both indicators of attention stressing the role of the serotonergic system for cognitive functions.

Two correlates of outcome processing in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) have been proposed in the literature: One hypothesis suggests that the lateral/medial division relates to representation of outcome valence (negative vs. positive), and the other suggests that the medial OFC maintains steady stimulus-outcome associations, whereas the lateral OFC represents changing (unsteady) outcomes to prepare for response shifts. These two hypotheses were contrasted by comparing the original with the inverted version of the Iowa Gambling Task in an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment. Results showed (1) that (caudo) lateral OFC was indeed sensitive to the steadiness of the outcomes and not merely to outcome valence and (2) that the original and the inverted tasks, although both designed to measure sensitivity for future outcomes, were not equivalent as they enacted different behaviors and brain activation patterns. Results are interpreted in terms of Kahneman and Tversky's prospect theory suggesting that cognitions and decisions are biased differentially when probabilistic future rewards are weighed against consistent punishments relative to the opposite scenario [Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39 , 341–350, 1984]. Specialized processing of unsteady rewards (involving caudolateral OFC) may have developed during evolution in support of goal-related thinking, prospective planning, and problem solving.