Alexandra C Pike1, Millie Lowther1, Oliver J Robinson1,2. 1. Anxiety Lab, Neuroscience and Mental Health Group, University College London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Alexandra House, 17-19 Queen Square, Bloomsbury, London, WC1N 3AR UK. 2. Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology Department, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Common currency tasks are tasks that investigate the same phenomenon in different species. In this review, we discuss how to ensure the translational validity of common currency tasks, summarise their benefits, present recent research in this area and offer future directions and recommendations. RECENT FINDINGS: We discuss the strengths and limitations of three specific examples where common currency tasks have added to our understanding of psychiatric constructs-affective bias, reversal learning and goal-based decision making. SUMMARY: Overall, common currency tasks offer the potential to improve drug discovery in psychiatry. We recommend that researchers prioritise construct validity above face validity when designing common currency tasks and suggest that the evidence for construct validity is summarised in papers presenting research in this area.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Common currency tasks are tasks that investigate the same phenomenon in different species. In this review, we discuss how to ensure the translational validity of common currency tasks, summarise their benefits, present recent research in this area and offer future directions and recommendations. RECENT FINDINGS: We discuss the strengths and limitations of three specific examples where common currency tasks have added to our understanding of psychiatric constructs-affective bias, reversal learning and goal-based decision making. SUMMARY: Overall, common currency tasks offer the potential to improve drug discovery in psychiatry. We recommend that researchers prioritise construct validity above face validity when designing common currency tasks and suggest that the evidence for construct validity is summarised in papers presenting research in this area.
Authors: R G Morris; J J Downes; B J Sahakian; J L Evenden; A Heald; T W Robbins Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 1988-06 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Faith M Hanlon; Michael P Weisend; Derek A Hamilton; Aaron P Jones; Robert J Thoma; Mingxiong Huang; Kimberly Martin; Ronald A Yeo; Gregory A Miller; Jose M Cañive Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2006-07-14 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: T J Bussey; A Holmes; L Lyon; A C Mar; K A L McAllister; J Nithianantharajah; C A Oomen; L M Saksida Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2011-04-21 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Bilal A Bari; Megan J Moerke; Hank P Jedema; Devin P Effinger; Jeremiah Y Cohen; Charles W Bradberry Journal: Behav Neurosci Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 1.912