将探索/利用决策作为精神病、抑郁症和焦虑症的跨诊断目标进行审查

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Alex Lloyd, Jonathan P. Roiser, Sarah Skeen, Ze Freeman, Aygun Badalova, Adeola Agunbiade, Chuma Busakhwe, Carla DeFlorio, Anna Marcu, Heather Pirie, Romana Saleh, Theresa Snyder, Pasco Fearon, Essi Viding
{"title":"将探索/利用决策作为精神病、抑郁症和焦虑症的跨诊断目标进行审查","authors":"Alex Lloyd, Jonathan P. Roiser, Sarah Skeen, Ze Freeman, Aygun Badalova, Adeola Agunbiade, Chuma Busakhwe, Carla DeFlorio, Anna Marcu, Heather Pirie, Romana Saleh, Theresa Snyder, Pasco Fearon, Essi Viding","doi":"10.3758/s13415-024-01186-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In many everyday decisions, individuals choose between trialling something novel or something they know well. Deciding when to try a new option or stick with an option that is already known to you, known as the “explore/exploit” dilemma, is an important feature of cognition that characterises a range of decision-making contexts encountered by humans. Recent evidence has suggested preferences in explore/exploit biases are associated with psychopathology, although this has typically been examined within individual disorders. The current review examined whether explore/exploit decision-making represents a promising transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. A systematic search of academic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 29 studies. Studies examining psychosis were mostly consistent in showing that individuals with psychosis explored more compared with individuals without psychosis. The literature on anxiety and depression was more heterogenous; some studies found that anxiety and depression were associated with more exploration, whereas other studies demonstrated reduced exploration in anxiety and depression. However, examining a subset of studies that employed case-control methods, there was some evidence that both anxiety and depression also were associated with increased exploration. Due to the heterogeneity across the literature, we suggest that there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether explore/exploit decision-making is a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. However, alongside our advisory groups of lived experience advisors, we suggest that this context of decision-making is a promising candidate that merits further investigation using well-powered, longitudinal designs. Such work also should examine whether biases in explore/exploit choices are amenable to intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":50672,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reviewing explore/exploit decision-making as a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety\",\"authors\":\"Alex Lloyd, Jonathan P. Roiser, Sarah Skeen, Ze Freeman, Aygun Badalova, Adeola Agunbiade, Chuma Busakhwe, Carla DeFlorio, Anna Marcu, Heather Pirie, Romana Saleh, Theresa Snyder, Pasco Fearon, Essi Viding\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13415-024-01186-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In many everyday decisions, individuals choose between trialling something novel or something they know well. Deciding when to try a new option or stick with an option that is already known to you, known as the “explore/exploit” dilemma, is an important feature of cognition that characterises a range of decision-making contexts encountered by humans. Recent evidence has suggested preferences in explore/exploit biases are associated with psychopathology, although this has typically been examined within individual disorders. The current review examined whether explore/exploit decision-making represents a promising transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. A systematic search of academic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 29 studies. Studies examining psychosis were mostly consistent in showing that individuals with psychosis explored more compared with individuals without psychosis. The literature on anxiety and depression was more heterogenous; some studies found that anxiety and depression were associated with more exploration, whereas other studies demonstrated reduced exploration in anxiety and depression. However, examining a subset of studies that employed case-control methods, there was some evidence that both anxiety and depression also were associated with increased exploration. Due to the heterogeneity across the literature, we suggest that there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether explore/exploit decision-making is a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. However, alongside our advisory groups of lived experience advisors, we suggest that this context of decision-making is a promising candidate that merits further investigation using well-powered, longitudinal designs. Such work also should examine whether biases in explore/exploit choices are amenable to intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01186-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01186-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在许多日常决策中,人们都会在尝试新事物和熟悉事物之间做出选择。决定何时尝试新的选择,还是坚持已经熟悉的选择,这就是所谓的 "探索/开发 "困境,它是认知的一个重要特征,是人类遇到的一系列决策情境的特点。最近有证据表明,探索/开发偏差的偏好与精神病理学有关,尽管这通常是在个别疾病中进行的研究。本综述研究了探索/开发决策是否是治疗精神病、抑郁症和焦虑症的一个有前景的跨诊断目标。我们对学术数据库进行了系统性检索,共收集到 29 项研究。有关精神病的研究大多一致表明,与非精神病患者相比,精神病患者的探索行为更多。关于焦虑症和抑郁症的文献则较为混杂;一些研究发现焦虑症和抑郁症与更多的探索有关,而另一些研究则表明焦虑症和抑郁症患者的探索减少。不过,通过对采用病例对照方法的部分研究进行分析,有证据表明焦虑和抑郁也与探索增加有关。由于文献中的异质性,我们认为目前还没有足够的证据来断定探索/利用决策是否是精神病、抑郁症和焦虑症的跨诊断目标。然而,与我们的生活经验顾问小组一起,我们认为这种决策背景是一个很有希望的候选目标,值得我们利用有充分证据支持的纵向设计进行进一步研究。这项工作还应该研究探索/开发选择中的偏差是否可以进行干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Reviewing explore/exploit decision-making as a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety

Reviewing explore/exploit decision-making as a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety

In many everyday decisions, individuals choose between trialling something novel or something they know well. Deciding when to try a new option or stick with an option that is already known to you, known as the “explore/exploit” dilemma, is an important feature of cognition that characterises a range of decision-making contexts encountered by humans. Recent evidence has suggested preferences in explore/exploit biases are associated with psychopathology, although this has typically been examined within individual disorders. The current review examined whether explore/exploit decision-making represents a promising transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. A systematic search of academic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 29 studies. Studies examining psychosis were mostly consistent in showing that individuals with psychosis explored more compared with individuals without psychosis. The literature on anxiety and depression was more heterogenous; some studies found that anxiety and depression were associated with more exploration, whereas other studies demonstrated reduced exploration in anxiety and depression. However, examining a subset of studies that employed case-control methods, there was some evidence that both anxiety and depression also were associated with increased exploration. Due to the heterogeneity across the literature, we suggest that there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether explore/exploit decision-making is a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety. However, alongside our advisory groups of lived experience advisors, we suggest that this context of decision-making is a promising candidate that merits further investigation using well-powered, longitudinal designs. Such work also should examine whether biases in explore/exploit choices are amenable to intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.40%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience (CABN) offers theoretical, review, and primary research articles on behavior and brain processes in humans. Coverage includes normal function as well as patients with injuries or processes that influence brain function: neurological disorders, including both healthy and disordered aging; and psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and depression. CABN is the leading vehicle for strongly psychologically motivated studies of brain–behavior relationships, through the presentation of papers that integrate psychological theory and the conduct and interpretation of the neuroscientific data. The range of topics includes perception, attention, memory, language, problem solving, reasoning, and decision-making; emotional processes, motivation, reward prediction, and affective states; and individual differences in relevant domains, including personality. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience is a publication of the Psychonomic Society.
×
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