A computational approach to understanding effort-based decision-making in depression.

Vincent Valton, Anahit Mkrtchian, Madeleine Moses-Payne, Alan Gray, Karel Kieslich, Samantha VanUrk, Veronika Samborska, Don Chamith Halahakoon, Sanjay G Manohar, Peter Dayan, Masud Husain, Jonathan P Roiser
{"title":"A computational approach to understanding effort-based decision-making in depression.","authors":"Vincent Valton, Anahit Mkrtchian, Madeleine Moses-Payne, Alan Gray, Karel Kieslich, Samantha VanUrk, Veronika Samborska, Don Chamith Halahakoon, Sanjay G Manohar, Peter Dayan, Masud Husain, Jonathan P Roiser","doi":"10.1101/2024.06.17.599286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Motivational dysfunction is a core feature of depression, and can have debilitating effects on everyday function. However, it is unclear which disrupted cognitive processes underlie impaired motivation, and whether impairments persist following remission. Decision-making concerning exerting effort to obtain rewards offers a promising framework for understanding motivation, especially when examined with computational tools which can offer precise quantification of latent processes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Effort-based decision-making was assessed using the Apple Gathering Task, in which participants decide whether to exert effort via a grip-force device to obtain varying levels of reward; effort levels were individually calibrated and varied parametrically. We present a comprehensive computational analysis of decision-making, initially validating our model in healthy volunteers (N=67), before applying it in a case-control study including current (N=41) and remitted (N=46) unmedicated depressed individuals, and healthy volunteers with (N=36) and without (N=57) a family history of depression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four fundamental computational mechanisms that drive patterns of effort-based decisions, which replicated across samples, were identified: overall bias to accept effort challenges; reward sensitivity; and linear and quadratic effort sensitivity. Traditional model-agnostic analyses showed that both depressed groups showed lower willingness to exert effort. In contrast with previous findings, computational analysis revealed that this difference was primarily driven by lower effort acceptance bias, but not altered effort or reward sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This work provides insight into the computational mechanisms underlying motivational dysfunction in depression. Lower willingness to exert effort could represent a trait-like factor contributing to symptoms, and might represent a fruitful target for treatment and prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":519960,"journal":{"name":"bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452193/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.17.599286","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Motivational dysfunction is a core feature of depression, and can have debilitating effects on everyday function. However, it is unclear which disrupted cognitive processes underlie impaired motivation, and whether impairments persist following remission. Decision-making concerning exerting effort to obtain rewards offers a promising framework for understanding motivation, especially when examined with computational tools which can offer precise quantification of latent processes.

Methods: Effort-based decision-making was assessed using the Apple Gathering Task, in which participants decide whether to exert effort via a grip-force device to obtain varying levels of reward; effort levels were individually calibrated and varied parametrically. We present a comprehensive computational analysis of decision-making, initially validating our model in healthy volunteers (N=67), before applying it in a case-control study including current (N=41) and remitted (N=46) unmedicated depressed individuals, and healthy volunteers with (N=36) and without (N=57) a family history of depression.

Results: Four fundamental computational mechanisms that drive patterns of effort-based decisions, which replicated across samples, were identified: overall bias to accept effort challenges; reward sensitivity; and linear and quadratic effort sensitivity. Traditional model-agnostic analyses showed that both depressed groups showed lower willingness to exert effort. In contrast with previous findings, computational analysis revealed that this difference was primarily driven by lower effort acceptance bias, but not altered effort or reward sensitivity.

Conclusions: This work provides insight into the computational mechanisms underlying motivational dysfunction in depression. Lower willingness to exert effort could represent a trait-like factor contributing to symptoms, and might represent a fruitful target for treatment and prevention.

用计算方法理解抑郁症患者基于努力的决策。
背景:动机功能障碍是抑郁症的一个核心特征,可对日常功能产生削弱性影响。然而,目前还不清楚哪些认知过程受到破坏是导致动机受损的原因,也不清楚这种损伤是否会在病情缓解后持续存在。有关付出努力以获得奖励的决策为理解动机提供了一个很有前景的框架,尤其是在使用计算工具对潜在过程进行精确量化的情况下:我们使用 "苹果收集任务 "对基于努力的决策进行了评估,在该任务中,参与者决定是否通过握力装置付出努力以获得不同程度的奖励;努力程度是单独校准的,并按参数变化。我们对决策进行了全面的计算分析,首先在健康志愿者(67 人)中验证了我们的模型,然后将其应用于病例对照研究,包括当前(41 人)和缓解(46 人)的未服药抑郁症患者,以及有(36 人)和无(57 人)抑郁症家族史的健康志愿者:研究发现了四种基本的计算机制,这些机制驱动着基于努力的决策模式,并在不同样本中得到了复制:接受努力挑战的总体偏差;奖励敏感性;以及线性和二次努力敏感性。传统的模式识别分析表明,两个抑郁组都表现出较低的努力意愿。与之前的研究结果不同,计算分析表明,这种差异是由较低的努力接受偏差造成的,而不是由改变了的努力或奖励敏感性造成的:结论:这项研究深入揭示了抑郁症动机功能障碍的计算机制。较低的努力意愿可能是导致症状的一个特质样因素,并可能成为治疗和预防的一个富有成效的目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信