Understanding cognitive control in depression: the interactive role of emotion, expected efficacy and reward.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Mostafa Toobaei, Mohammadreza Taghavi, Laura Jobson
{"title":"Understanding cognitive control in depression: the interactive role of emotion, expected efficacy and reward.","authors":"Mostafa Toobaei, Mohammadreza Taghavi, Laura Jobson","doi":"10.1186/s12888-025-06847-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Difficulties in cognitive control over negative emotional stimuli are a key characteristic of depression. The Expected Value of Control (EVC) provides a framework for understanding how cognitive control is allocated, focusing on the motivational factors of efficacy and reward. Efficacy is the likelihood that an effort will result in a specific result, while reward is the value assigned to that outcome. However, the impact of emotion on the estimation of EVC has not been explored. We investigated the interplay between emotion and motivation, using the EVC theoretical framework, in depression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized a within-between-subject design. The subjects were healthy controls (n = 31) and those with depression (n = 36), who underwent a clinical diagnostic interview, completed the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, and participated in an incentivized Emotional Stroop Paradigm, whereby participants received cues indicating different levels of efficacy (low vs. high) and reward (low vs. high) prior to the targeted stimuli.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant interactions were detected between a) group × emotional valence × efficacy, and b) group × reward regarding accuracy rates on the Emotional Stroop Task. Follow-up analyses revealed that during high-efficacy trials, the Control group demonstrated significantly greater accuracy than the Depressed group for both positive and neutral stimuli. In low-efficacy trials, the Controls were also significantly more accurate than the Depressed group when responding to negative stimuli. Additionally, the Depressed group performed significantly worse than Controls on high-reward trials, no significant difference was detected between the two groups on low-reward trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The emotional valence of stimuli can influence the assessment of reward efficacy, and individuals with depression may have difficulties focusing on reward cues. Further research is necessary to incorporate emotion into the EVC framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":9029,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychiatry","volume":"25 1","pages":"406"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12010535/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06847-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Difficulties in cognitive control over negative emotional stimuli are a key characteristic of depression. The Expected Value of Control (EVC) provides a framework for understanding how cognitive control is allocated, focusing on the motivational factors of efficacy and reward. Efficacy is the likelihood that an effort will result in a specific result, while reward is the value assigned to that outcome. However, the impact of emotion on the estimation of EVC has not been explored. We investigated the interplay between emotion and motivation, using the EVC theoretical framework, in depression.

Methods: We utilized a within-between-subject design. The subjects were healthy controls (n = 31) and those with depression (n = 36), who underwent a clinical diagnostic interview, completed the General Health Questionnaire-12, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, and participated in an incentivized Emotional Stroop Paradigm, whereby participants received cues indicating different levels of efficacy (low vs. high) and reward (low vs. high) prior to the targeted stimuli.

Results: Significant interactions were detected between a) group × emotional valence × efficacy, and b) group × reward regarding accuracy rates on the Emotional Stroop Task. Follow-up analyses revealed that during high-efficacy trials, the Control group demonstrated significantly greater accuracy than the Depressed group for both positive and neutral stimuli. In low-efficacy trials, the Controls were also significantly more accurate than the Depressed group when responding to negative stimuli. Additionally, the Depressed group performed significantly worse than Controls on high-reward trials, no significant difference was detected between the two groups on low-reward trials.

Conclusion: The emotional valence of stimuli can influence the assessment of reward efficacy, and individuals with depression may have difficulties focusing on reward cues. Further research is necessary to incorporate emotion into the EVC framework.

了解抑郁症的认知控制:情绪、预期效能和奖励的互动作用。
背景:对负面情绪刺激的认知控制困难是抑郁症的一个重要特征。控制期望值(EVC)为理解认知控制如何分配提供了一个框架,重点关注效能和奖励的激励因素。效能是努力产生特定结果的可能性,而奖励是分配给该结果的价值。然而,情绪对EVC估计的影响尚未被探讨。我们使用EVC理论框架研究了抑郁症中情绪和动机之间的相互作用。方法:采用受试者间设计。研究对象为健康对照者(n = 31)和抑郁症患者(n = 36),他们接受临床诊断访谈,完成一般健康问卷-12、贝克抑郁量表- ii,并参与激动机情绪斯特鲁普范式,参与者在目标刺激之前收到不同水平的疗效(低与高)和奖励(低与高)的提示。结果:a)组×情绪效价组和b)组×奖励组在情绪Stroop任务的正确率方面存在显著的交互作用。后续分析显示,在高效试验中,对照组对正性和中性刺激的准确性明显高于抑郁组。在低效试验中,控制组对负面刺激的反应也明显比抑郁组更准确。此外,抑郁组在高奖励试验中的表现明显差于对照组,在低奖励试验中两组之间没有显著差异。结论:刺激的情绪效价会影响奖励效能的评估,抑郁症患者可能难以关注奖励线索。将情绪纳入EVC框架还需要进一步的研究。
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
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychiatry is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of psychiatric disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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