Alexander Soutschek1, Geraldine Gvozdanovic2, Rouba Kozak3, Sridhar Duvvuri4, Nicholas de Martinis3, Brian Harel3, David L Gray5, Ernst Fehr6, Alexander Jetter7, Philippe N Tobler6. 1. Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: alexander.soutschek@econ.uzh.ch. 2. Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 3. Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 4. Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 5. Cerevel Therapeutics, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Neuroscience Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 7. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Activation of D1 receptors has been related to successful goal-directed behavior, but it remains unclear whether D1 receptor activation causally tips the balance of weighing costs and benefits in humans. Here, we tested the impact of pharmacologically stimulated D1 receptors on sensitivity to risk, delay, and effort costs in economic choice and investigated whether D1 receptor stimulation would bias preferences toward options with increased costs in a cost-specific manner. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 1 study, 120 healthy young volunteers received either placebo or 1 of 3 doses (6 mg, 15 mg, or 30 mg) of a novel, selective D1 agonist (PF-06412562). After drug administration, participants performed decision tasks measuring their preferences for risky, delayed, and effortful outcomes. RESULTS: Higher doses of the D1 agonist increased the willingness to exert physical effort for reward as well as reduced the preference for risky outcomes. We observed no effects on preferences for delayed rewards. CONCLUSIONS: The current results provide evidence that D1 receptor stimulation causally affects core aspects of cost-benefit decision making in humans.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Activation of D1 receptors has been related to successful goal-directed behavior, but it remains unclear whether D1 receptor activation causally tips the balance of weighing costs and benefits in humans. Here, we tested the impact of pharmacologically stimulated D1 receptors on sensitivity to risk, delay, and effort costs in economic choice and investigated whether D1 receptor stimulation would bias preferences toward options with increased costs in a cost-specific manner. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 1 study, 120 healthy young volunteers received either placebo or 1 of 3 doses (6 mg, 15 mg, or 30 mg) of a novel, selective D1 agonist (PF-06412562). After drug administration, participants performed decision tasks measuring their preferences for risky, delayed, and effortful outcomes. RESULTS: Higher doses of the D1 agonist increased the willingness to exert physical effort for reward as well as reduced the preference for risky outcomes. We observed no effects on preferences for delayed rewards. CONCLUSIONS: The current results provide evidence that D1 receptor stimulation causally affects core aspects of cost-benefit decision making in humans.
Authors: Alexander Soutschek; Alexandra Bagaïni; Todd A Hare; Philippe N Tobler Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.436
Authors: Rouba Kozak; Tamás Kiss; Keith Dlugolenski; David E Johnson; Roxanne R Gorczyca; Kyle Kuszpit; Brian D Harvey; Polina Stolyar; Stacey J Sukoff Rizzo; William E Hoffmann; Dmitri Volfson; Mihaly Hajós; Jennifer E Davoren; Amanda L Abbott; Graham V Williams; Stacy A Castner; David L Gray Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Anissa Abi-Dargham; Jonathan A Javitch; Mark Slifstein; Alan Anticevic; Monica E Calkins; Youngsun T Cho; Clara Fonteneau; Roberto Gil; Ragy Girgis; Raquel E Gur; Ruben C Gur; Jack Grinband; Joshua Kantrowitz; Christian Kohler; John Krystal; John Murray; Mohini Ranganathan; Nicole Santamauro; Jared Van Snellenberg; Zailyn Tamayo; Daniel Wolf; David Gray; Jeffrey Lieberman Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 7.348
Authors: Georgia Eleni Kapetaniou; Matthias A Reinhard; Patricia Christian; Andrea Jobst; Philippe N Tobler; Frank Padberg; Alexander Soutschek Journal: Elife Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Tara L Moore; Damon A Young; Ronald J Killiany; Kari R Fonseca; Dmitri Volfson; David L Gray; Rita Balice-Gordon; Rouba Kozak Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2021-11-26 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Heather E Webber; Paula Lopez-Gamundi; Sydney N Stamatovich; Harriet de Wit; Margaret C Wardle Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2020-11-14 Impact factor: 8.989