BACKGROUND: While stimulant-dependent individuals continue to make risky decisions, in spite of poor outcomes, much less is known about decision-making characteristics of occasional stimulant users (OSU) at risk for developing stimulant dependence. This study examines whether OSU exhibit inefficient learning and execution of reinforced decision-outcome contingencies. METHODS: Occasional stimulant users (n = 161) and stimulant-naïve comparison subjects (CTL) (n = 48) performed a Paper Scissors Rock task during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Selecting a particular option was associated with a predetermined probability of winning, which was altered repeatedly to examine neural and behavioral characteristics of reinforced contingencies. RESULTS: Occasional stimulant users displayed greater anterior insula, inferior frontal gyrus, and dorsal striatum activation than CTL during late trials when contingencies were familiar (as opposed to being learned) in the presence of comparable behavioral performance in both groups. Follow-up analyses demonstrated that during late trials: 1) OSU with high cannabis use displayed greater activation in these brain regions than CTL, whereas OSU with low cannabis use did not differ from the other two groups; and 2) OSU preferring cocaine exhibited greater anterior insula, inferior frontal gyrus, and dorsal striatum activation than CTL and also displayed higher activation in the former two regions than OSU who preferred prescription stimulants. CONCLUSIONS: Occasional stimulant users exhibit inefficient resource allocation during the execution of reinforced contingencies that may be a result of additive effects of cocaine and cannabis use. A critical next step is to establish whether this inefficiency predicts transition to stimulant dependence.
BACKGROUND: While stimulant-dependent individuals continue to make risky decisions, in spite of poor outcomes, much less is known about decision-making characteristics of occasional stimulant users (OSU) at risk for developing stimulant dependence. This study examines whether OSU exhibit inefficient learning and execution of reinforced decision-outcome contingencies. METHODS: Occasional stimulant users (n = 161) and stimulant-naïve comparison subjects (CTL) (n = 48) performed a Paper Scissors Rock task during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Selecting a particular option was associated with a predetermined probability of winning, which was altered repeatedly to examine neural and behavioral characteristics of reinforced contingencies. RESULTS: Occasional stimulant users displayed greater anterior insula, inferior frontal gyrus, and dorsal striatum activation than CTL during late trials when contingencies were familiar (as opposed to being learned) in the presence of comparable behavioral performance in both groups. Follow-up analyses demonstrated that during late trials: 1) OSU with high cannabis use displayed greater activation in these brain regions than CTL, whereas OSU with low cannabis use did not differ from the other two groups; and 2) OSU preferring cocaine exhibited greater anterior insula, inferior frontal gyrus, and dorsal striatum activation than CTL and also displayed higher activation in the former two regions than OSU who preferred prescription stimulants. CONCLUSIONS: Occasional stimulant users exhibit inefficient resource allocation during the execution of reinforced contingencies that may be a result of additive effects of cocaine and cannabis use. A critical next step is to establish whether this inefficiency predicts transition to stimulant dependence.
Authors: Martin P Paulus; Nikki E Hozack; Blanca E Zauscher; Lawrence Frank; Gregory G Brown; David L Braff; Marc A Schuckit Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Jatin G Vaidya; Robert I Block; Daniel S O'Leary; Laura B Ponto; Mohamed M Ghoneim; Antoine Bechara Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: H Garavan; J Pankiewicz; A Bloom; J K Cho; L Sperry; T J Ross; B J Salmeron; R Risinger; D Kelley; E A Stein Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: John O'Doherty; Peter Dayan; Johannes Schultz; Ralf Deichmann; Karl Friston; Raymond J Dolan Journal: Science Date: 2004-04-16 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: K K Bucholz; R Cadoret; C R Cloninger; S H Dinwiddie; V M Hesselbrock; J I Nurnberger; T Reich; I Schmidt; M A Schuckit Journal: J Stud Alcohol Date: 1994-03
Authors: K I Bolla; D A Eldreth; E D London; K A Kiehl; M Mouratidis; C Contoreggi; J A Matochik; V Kurian; J L Cadet; A S Kimes; F R Funderburk; M Ernst Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Katia M Harlé; Jennifer L Stewart; Shunan Zhang; Susan F Tapert; Angela J Yu; Martin P Paulus Journal: Brain Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Jennifer L Stewart; Colm G Connolly; April C May; Susan F Tapert; Marc Wittmann; Martin P Paulus Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Jennifer L Stewart; Ashley L Juavinett; April C May; Paul W Davenport; Martin P Paulus Journal: Psychophysiology Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Katia M Harlé; Pradeep Shenoy; Jennifer L Stewart; Susan F Tapert; Angela J Yu; Martin P Paulus Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2014-03-26 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Melanie A Blair; Jennifer L Stewart; April C May; Martina Reske; Susan F Tapert; Martin P Paulus Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2018-03-21
Authors: Jennifer L Stewart; Colm G Connolly; April C May; Susan F Tapert; Marc Wittmann; Martin P Paulus Journal: Addiction Date: 2013-12-15 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Scott Mackey; Jennifer L Stewart; Colm G Connolly; Susan F Tapert; Martin P Paulus Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 4.492