4.0 Article

Reversal learning in those with early psychosis features contingency-dependent changes in loss response and learning

期刊

COGNITIVE NEUROPSYCHIATRY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13546805.2023.2259019

关键词

Cognition; behaviour; schizophrenia; striatum; schizoaffective

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Individuals with early psychosis exhibit altered responses to loss and hyper-adaptability to outcome changes, which may be a compensatory response to corticostriatal changes associated with psychotic disorders.
IntroductionPeople with psychotic disorders commonly feature broad decision-making impairments that impact their functional outcomes. Specific associative/reinforcement learning problems have been demonstrated in persistent psychosis. But these phenotypes may differ in early psychosis, suggesting that aspects of cognition decline over time.MethodsThe present proof-of-concept study examined goal-directed action and reversal learning in controls and those with early psychosis.ResultsEquivalent performance was observed between groups during outcome-specific devaluation, and reversal learning at an 80:20 contingency (reward probability for high:low targets). But when the low target reward probability was increased (80:40) those with early psychosis altered their response to loss, whereas controls did not. Computational modelling confirmed that in early psychosis there was a change in punishment learning that increased the chance of staying with the same stimulus after a loss, multiple trials into the future. In early psychosis, the magnitude of this response was greatest in those with higher IQ and lower clinical severity scores.ConclusionsWe show preliminary evidence that those with early psychosis present with a phenotype that includes altered responding to loss and hyper-adaptability in response to outcome changes. This may reflect a compensatory response to overcome the milieu of corticostriatal changes associated with psychotic disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据