Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (48) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (38)
- Other (6)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Preprint (1)
- Review (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (48) (remove)
Keywords
- Alcohol dependence (5)
- fMRI (5)
- Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (4)
- Reinforcement learning (4)
- alcohol (4)
- Decision-making (2)
- Dementia (2)
- Dopamine (2)
- Intelligence (2)
- PET (2)
Genetic and environmental factors both contribute to cognitive test performance. A substantial increase in average intelligence test results in the second half of the previous century within one generation is unlikely to be explained by genetic changes. One possible explanation for the strong malleability of cognitive performance measure is that environmental factors modify gene expression via epigenetic mechanisms. Epigenetic factors may help to understand the recent observations of an association between dopamine-dependent encoding of reward prediction errors and cognitive capacity, which was modulated by adverse life events. The possible manifestation of malleable biomarkers contributing to variance in cognitive test performance, and thus possibly contributing to the "missing heritability" between estimates from twin studies and variance explained by genetic markers, is still unclear. Here we show in 1475 healthy adolescents from the IMaging and GENetics (IMAGEN) sample that general IQ (gIQ) is associated with (1) polygenic scores for intelligence, (2) epigenetic modification of DRD2 gene, (3) gray matter density in striatum, and (4) functional striatal activation elicited by temporarily surprising reward-predicting cues. Comparing the relative importance for the prediction of gIQ in an overlapping subsample, our results demonstrate neurobiological correlates of the malleability of gIQ and point to equal importance of genetic variance, epigenetic modification of DRD2 receptor gene, as well as functional striatal activation, known to influence dopamine neurotransmission. Peripheral epigenetic markers are in need of confirmation in the central nervous system and should be tested in longitudinal settings specifically assessing individual and environmental factors that modify epigenetic structure.
Mobile data collection of cognitive-behavioral tasks in substance use disorders: Where are we now?
(2022)
Introduction: Over the last decades, our understanding of the cognitive, motivational, and neural processes involved in addictive behavior has increased enormously. A plethora of laboratory-based and cross-sectional studies has linked cognitive-behavioral measures to between-subject differences in drinking behavior. However, such laboratory-based studies inevitably suffer from small sample sizes and the inability to link temporal fluctuations in task measures to fluctuations in real-life substance use. To overcome these problems, several existing behavioral tasks have been transferred to smartphones to allow studying cognition in the field. Method: In this narrative review, we first summarize studies that used existing behavioral tasks in the laboratory and self-reports of substance use with ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in the field. Next, we review studies on psychometric properties of smartphone-based behavioral tasks. Finally, we review studies that used both smartphone-based tasks and self-reports with EMA in the field. Results: Overall, studies were scarce and heterogenous both in tasks and in study outcomes. Nevertheless, existing findings are promising and point toward several methodological recommendations: concerning psychometrics, studies show that - although more systematic studies are necessary - task validity and reliability can be improved, for example, by analyzing several measurement sessions at once rather than analyzing sessions separately. Studies that use tasks in the field, moreover, show that power can be improved by choosing sampling schemes that combine time-based with event-based sampling, rather than relying on time-based sampling alone. Increasing sampling frequency can further increase power. However, as this also increases the burden to participants, more research is necessary to determine the ideal sampling frequency for each task. Conclusion: Although more research is necessary to systematically study both the psychometrics of smartphone-based tasks and the frequency at which task measures fluctuate, existing studies are promising and reveal important methodological recommendations useful for researchers interested in implementing behavioral tasks in EMA studies.
Background: Human and animal work suggests a shift from goal-directed to habitual decision-making in addiction. However, the evidence for this in human alcohol dependence is as yet inconclusive. Methods: Twenty-six healthy controls and 26 recently detoxified alcohol-dependent patients underwent behavioral testing with a 2-step task designed to disentangle goal-directed and habitual response patterns. Results: Alcohol-dependent patients showed less evidence of goal-directed choices than healthy controls, particularly after losses. There was no difference in the strength of the habitual component. The group differences did not survive controlling for performance on the Digit Symbol Substitution Task. Conclusion: Chronic alcohol use appears to selectively impair goal-directed function, rather than promoting habitual responding. It appears to do so particularly after nonrewards, and this may be mediated by the effects of alcohol on more general cognitive functions subserved by the prefrontal cortex.
The influence of Pavlovian conditioned stimuli on ongoing behavior may contribute to explaining how alcohol cues stimulate drug seeking and intake. Using a Pavlovian-instrumental transfer task, we investigated the effects of alcohol-related cues on approach behavior (i.e., instrumental response behavior) and its neural correlates, and related both to the relapse after detoxification in alcohol-dependent patients. Thirty-one recently detoxified alcohol-dependent patients and 24 healthy controls underwent instrumental training, where approach or non-approach towards initially neutral stimuli was reinforced by monetary incentives. Approach behavior was tested during extinction with either alcohol-related or neutral stimuli (as Pavlovian cues) presented in the background during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Patients were subsequently followed up for 6 months. We observed that alcohol-related background stimuli inhibited the approach behavior in detoxified alcohol-dependent patients (t = -3.86, p < .001), but not in healthy controls (t = -0.92, p = .36). This behavioral inhibition was associated with neural activation in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) (t((30)) = 2.06, p < .05). Interestingly, both the effects were only present in subsequent abstainers, but not relapsers and in those with mild but not severe dependence. Our data show that alcohol-related cues can acquire inhibitory behavioral features typical of aversive stimuli despite being accompanied by a stronger NAcc activation, suggesting salience attribution. The fact that these findings are restricted to abstinence and milder illness suggests that they may be potential resilience factors.
One of the major risk factors for global death and disability is alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use. While there is increasing knowledge with respect to individual factors promoting the initiation and maintenance of substance use disorders (SUDs), disease trajectories involved in losing and regaining control over drug intake (ReCoDe) are still not well described. Our newly formed German Collaborative Research Centre (CRC) on ReCoDe has an interdisciplinary approach funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) with a 12-year perspective. The main goals of our research consortium are (i) to identify triggers and modifying factors that longitudinally modulate the trajectories of losing and regaining control over drug consumption in real life, (ii) to study underlying behavioral, cognitive, and neurobiological mechanisms, and (iii) to implicate mechanism-based interventions. These goals will be achieved by: (i) using mobile health (m-health) tools to longitudinally monitor the effects of triggers (drug cues, stressors, and priming doses) and modify factors (eg, age, gender, physical activity, and cognitive control) on drug consumption patterns in real-life conditions and in animal models of addiction; (ii) the identification and computational modeling of key mechanisms mediating the effects of such triggers and modifying factors on goal-directed, habitual, and compulsive aspects of behavior from human studies and animal models; and (iii) developing and testing interventions that specifically target the underlying mechanisms for regaining control over drug intake.
Behavioral choice can be characterized along two axes. One axis distinguishes reflexive, model-free systems that slowly accumulate values through experience and a model-based system that uses knowledge to reason prospectively. The second axis distinguishes Pavlovian valuation of stimuli from instrumental valuation of actions or stimulus–action pairs. This results in four values and many possible interactions between them, with important consequences for accounts of individual variation. We here explored whether individual variation along one axis was related to individual variation along the other. Specifically, we asked whether individuals' balance between model-based and model-free learning was related to their tendency to show Pavlovian interferences with instrumental decisions. In two independent samples with a total of 243 participants, Pavlovian–instrumental transfer effects were negatively correlated with the strength of model-based reasoning in a two-step task. This suggests a potential common underlying substrate predisposing individuals to both have strong Pavlovian interference and be less model-based and provides a framework within which to interpret the observation of both effects in addiction.
Background Anxiety and depressive disorders share common features of mood dysfunctions. This has stimulated interest in transdiagnostic dimensional research as proposed by the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) approach by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) aiming to improve the understanding of underlying disease mechanisms. The purpose of this study was to investigate the processing of RDoC domains in relation to disease severity in order to identify latent disorder-specific as well as transdiagnostic indicators of disease severity in patients with anxiety and depressive disorders.
Methods Within the German research network for mental disorders, 895 participants (n = 476 female, n = 602 anxiety disorder, n = 257 depressive disorder) were recruited for the Phenotypic, Diagnostic and Clinical Domain Assessment Network Germany (PD-CAN) and included in this cross-sectional study. We performed incremental regression models to investigate the association of four RDoC domains on disease severity in patients with affective disorders: Positive (PVS) and Negative Valance System (NVS), Cognitive Systems (CS) and Social Processes (SP).
Results The results confirmed a transdiagnostic relationship for all four domains, as we found significant main effects on disease severity within domain-specific models (PVS: & beta; = -0.35; NVS: & beta; = 0.39; CS: & beta; = -0.12; SP: & beta; = -0.32). We also found three significant interaction effects with main diagnosis showing a disease-specific association.
Limitations The cross-sectional study design prevents causal conclusions. Further limitations include possible outliers and heteroskedasticity in all regression models which we appropriately controlled for.
Conclusion Our key results show that symptom burden in anxiety and depressive disorders is associated with latent RDoC indicators in transdiagnostic and disease-specific ways.
Pavlovian cues can influence ongoing instrumental behaviour via Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) processes. While appetitive Pavlovian cues tend to promote instrumental approach, they are detrimental when avoidance behaviour is required, and vice versa for aversive cues. We recently reported that susceptibility to interference between Pavlovian and instrumental control assessed via a PIT task was associated with risky alcohol use at age 18. We now investigated whether such susceptibility also predicts drinking trajectories until age 24, based on AUDIT (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test) consumption and binge drinking (gramme alcohol/drinking occasion) scores. The interference PIT effect, assessed at ages 18 and 21 during fMRI, was characterized by increased error rates (ER) and enhanced neural responses in the ventral striatum (VS), the lateral and dorsomedial prefrontal cortices (dmPFC) during conflict, that is, when an instrumental approach was required in the presence of an aversive Pavlovian cue or vice versa. We found that a stronger VS response during conflict at age 18 was associated with a higher starting point of both drinking trajectories but predicted a decrease in binge drinking. At age 21, high ER and enhanced neural responses in the dmPFC were associated with increasing AUDIT-C scores over the next 3 years until age 24. Overall, susceptibility to interference between Pavlovian and instrumental control might be viewed as a predisposing mechanism towards hazardous alcohol use during young adulthood, and the identified high-risk group may profit from targeted interventions.
Theories of decision-making and its neural substrates have long assumed the existence of two distinct and competing valuation systems, variously described as goal-directed vs. habitual, or, more recently and based on statistical arguments, as model-free vs. model-based reinforcement-learning. Though both have been shown to control choices, the cognitive abilities associated with these systems are under ongoing investigation. Here we examine the link to cognitive abilities, and find that individual differences in processing speed covary with a shift from model-free to model-based choice control in the presence of above-average working memory function. This suggests shared cognitive and neural processes; provides a bridge between literatures on intelligence and valuation; and may guide the development of process models of different valuation components. Furthermore, it provides a rationale for individual differences in the tendency to deploy valuation systems, which may be important for understanding the manifold neuropsychiatric diseases associated with malfunctions of valuation.