Dennis Hernaus1, Michael J Frank2, Elliot C Brown3, Jaime K Brown4, James M Gold4, James A Waltz4. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: dennis.hernaus@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; Department of Psychiatry and Brown Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 3. Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Institute for Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany. 4. Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motivational deficits in people with schizophrenia (PSZ) are associated with an inability to integrate the magnitude and probability of previous outcomes. The mechanisms that underlie probability-magnitude integration deficits, however, are poorly understood. We hypothesized that increased reliance on "valueless" stimulus-response associations, in lieu of expected value (EV)-based learning, could drive probability-magnitude integration deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits. METHODS: Healthy volunteers (n = 38) and PSZ (n = 49) completed a learning paradigm consisting of four stimulus pairs. Reward magnitude (3, 2, 1, 0 points) and probability (90%, 80%, 20%, 10%) determined each stimulus's EV. Following a learning phase, new and familiar stimulus pairings were presented. Participants were asked to select stimuli with the highest reward value. RESULTS: PSZ with high motivational deficits made increasingly less optimal choices as the difference in reward value (probability × magnitude) between two competing stimuli increased. Using a previously validated computational hybrid model, PSZ relied less on EV ("Q-learning") and more on stimulus-response learning ("actor-critic"), which correlated with Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms motivational deficit severity. PSZ specifically failed to represent reward magnitude, consistent with model demonstrations showing that response tendencies in the actor-critic were preferentially driven by reward probability. CONCLUSIONS: Probability-magnitude deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits arise from underutilization of EV in favor of reliance on valueless stimulus-response associations. Confirmed by our computational hybrid framework, probability-magnitude integration deficits were driven specifically by a failure to represent reward magnitude. This work provides a first mechanistic explanation of complex EV-based learning deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits that arise from an inability to combine information from different reward modalities.
BACKGROUND:Motivational deficits in people with schizophrenia (PSZ) are associated with an inability to integrate the magnitude and probability of previous outcomes. The mechanisms that underlie probability-magnitude integration deficits, however, are poorly understood. We hypothesized that increased reliance on "valueless" stimulus-response associations, in lieu of expected value (EV)-based learning, could drive probability-magnitude integration deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits. METHODS: Healthy volunteers (n = 38) and PSZ (n = 49) completed a learning paradigm consisting of four stimulus pairs. Reward magnitude (3, 2, 1, 0 points) and probability (90%, 80%, 20%, 10%) determined each stimulus's EV. Following a learning phase, new and familiar stimulus pairings were presented. Participants were asked to select stimuli with the highest reward value. RESULTS: PSZ with high motivational deficits made increasingly less optimal choices as the difference in reward value (probability × magnitude) between two competing stimuli increased. Using a previously validated computational hybrid model, PSZ relied less on EV ("Q-learning") and more on stimulus-response learning ("actor-critic"), which correlated with Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms motivational deficit severity. PSZ specifically failed to represent reward magnitude, consistent with model demonstrations showing that response tendencies in the actor-critic were preferentially driven by reward probability. CONCLUSIONS: Probability-magnitude deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits arise from underutilization of EV in favor of reliance on valueless stimulus-response associations. Confirmed by our computational hybrid framework, probability-magnitude integration deficits were driven specifically by a failure to represent reward magnitude. This work provides a first mechanistic explanation of complex EV-based learning deficits in PSZ with motivational deficits that arise from an inability to combine information from different reward modalities.
Authors: James M Gold; James A Waltz; Tatyana M Matveeva; Zuzana Kasanova; Gregory P Strauss; Ellen S Herbener; Anne G E Collins; Michael J Frank Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2012-02
Authors: Matthias N Hartmann-Riemer; Steffen Aschenbrenner; Magdalena Bossert; Celina Westermann; Erich Seifritz; Philippe N Tobler; Matthias Weisbrod; Stefan Kaiser Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Sara N Burke; Alex Thome; Kojo Plange; James R Engle; Theodore P Trouard; Katalin M Gothard; Carol A Barnes Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2014-07-23 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Elliot C Brown; Samantha M Hack; James M Gold; William T Carpenter; Bernard A Fischer; Kristen P Prentice; James A Waltz Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: James A Waltz; Ziye Xu; Elliot C Brown; Rebecca R Ruiz; Michael J Frank; James M Gold Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2017-08-12
Authors: Opeyemi O Alabi; M Felicia Davatolhagh; Mara Robinson; Michael P Fortunato; Luigim Vargas Cifuentes; Joseph W Kable; Marc Vincent Fuccillo Journal: Elife Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: E Pomarol-Clotet; J Radua; A Santo-Angles; P Fuentes-Claramonte; I Argila-Plaza; M Guardiola-Ripoll; C Almodóvar-Payá; J Munuera; P J McKenna Journal: Brain Struct Funct Date: 2021-04-11 Impact factor: 3.270
Authors: James M Gold; Philip R Corlett; Gregory P Strauss; Jason Schiffman; Lauren M Ellman; Elaine F Walker; Albert R Powers; Scott W Woods; James A Waltz; Steven M Silverstein; Vijay A Mittal Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Pamela D Butler; Matthew J Hoptman; David V Smith; Julia A Ermel; Daniel J Calderone; Sang Han Lee; Deanna M Barch Journal: J Psychiatr Brain Sci Date: 2020-02-27