Alexis E Whitton, Jessica A Cooper, Jaisal T Merchant, Michael T Treadway, Kathryn E Lewandowski
{"title":"利用计算表型鉴定整个精神病谱系中不同的努力分配策略。","authors":"Alexis E Whitton, Jessica A Cooper, Jaisal T Merchant, Michael T Treadway, Kathryn E Lewandowski","doi":"10.1093/schbul/sbae024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and hypothesis: </strong>Disturbances in effort-cost decision-making have been highlighted as a potential transdiagnostic process underpinning negative symptoms in individuals with schizophrenia. However, recent studies using computational phenotyping show that individuals employ a range of strategies to allocate effort, and use of different strategies is associated with unique clinical and cognitive characteristics. Building on prior work in schizophrenia, this study evaluated whether effort allocation strategies differed in individuals with distinct psychotic disorders.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We applied computational modeling to effort-cost decision-making data obtained from individuals with psychotic disorders (n = 190) who performed the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task. The sample included 91 individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder, 90 individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, and 52 controls.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>Different effort allocation strategies were observed both across and within different disorders. Relative to individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, a greater proportion of individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation. Furthermore, across disorders, different effort allocation strategies were associated with specific clinical and cognitive features. Those who did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation had more severe positive and negative symptoms, and poorer cognitive and community functioning. In contrast, those who only used reward value information showed a trend toward more severe positive symptoms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings indicate that similar deficits in effort-cost decision-making may arise from different computational mechanisms across the psychosis spectrum.</p>","PeriodicalId":21530,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"1127-1136"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11348999/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Computational Phenotyping to Identify Divergent Strategies for Effort Allocation Across the Psychosis Spectrum.\",\"authors\":\"Alexis E Whitton, Jessica A Cooper, Jaisal T Merchant, Michael T Treadway, Kathryn E Lewandowski\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/schbul/sbae024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and hypothesis: </strong>Disturbances in effort-cost decision-making have been highlighted as a potential transdiagnostic process underpinning negative symptoms in individuals with schizophrenia. However, recent studies using computational phenotyping show that individuals employ a range of strategies to allocate effort, and use of different strategies is associated with unique clinical and cognitive characteristics. Building on prior work in schizophrenia, this study evaluated whether effort allocation strategies differed in individuals with distinct psychotic disorders.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We applied computational modeling to effort-cost decision-making data obtained from individuals with psychotic disorders (n = 190) who performed the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task. The sample included 91 individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder, 90 individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, and 52 controls.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>Different effort allocation strategies were observed both across and within different disorders. Relative to individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, a greater proportion of individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation. Furthermore, across disorders, different effort allocation strategies were associated with specific clinical and cognitive features. Those who did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation had more severe positive and negative symptoms, and poorer cognitive and community functioning. In contrast, those who only used reward value information showed a trend toward more severe positive symptoms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings indicate that similar deficits in effort-cost decision-making may arise from different computational mechanisms across the psychosis spectrum.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21530,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1127-1136\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11348999/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbae024\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbae024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using Computational Phenotyping to Identify Divergent Strategies for Effort Allocation Across the Psychosis Spectrum.
Background and hypothesis: Disturbances in effort-cost decision-making have been highlighted as a potential transdiagnostic process underpinning negative symptoms in individuals with schizophrenia. However, recent studies using computational phenotyping show that individuals employ a range of strategies to allocate effort, and use of different strategies is associated with unique clinical and cognitive characteristics. Building on prior work in schizophrenia, this study evaluated whether effort allocation strategies differed in individuals with distinct psychotic disorders.
Study design: We applied computational modeling to effort-cost decision-making data obtained from individuals with psychotic disorders (n = 190) who performed the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task. The sample included 91 individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder, 90 individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, and 52 controls.
Study results: Different effort allocation strategies were observed both across and within different disorders. Relative to individuals with psychotic bipolar disorder, a greater proportion of individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation. Furthermore, across disorders, different effort allocation strategies were associated with specific clinical and cognitive features. Those who did not use reward value or probability information to guide effort allocation had more severe positive and negative symptoms, and poorer cognitive and community functioning. In contrast, those who only used reward value information showed a trend toward more severe positive symptoms.
Conclusions: These findings indicate that similar deficits in effort-cost decision-making may arise from different computational mechanisms across the psychosis spectrum.
期刊介绍:
Schizophrenia Bulletin seeks to review recent developments and empirically based hypotheses regarding the etiology and treatment of schizophrenia. We view the field as broad and deep, and will publish new knowledge ranging from the molecular basis to social and cultural factors. We will give new emphasis to translational reports which simultaneously highlight basic neurobiological mechanisms and clinical manifestations. Some of the Bulletin content is invited as special features or manuscripts organized as a theme by special guest editors. Most pages of the Bulletin are devoted to unsolicited manuscripts of high quality that report original data or where we can provide a special venue for a major study or workshop report. Supplement issues are sometimes provided for manuscripts reporting from a recent conference.