Hakimi Navid, Chou Ko-Ping, Stewart Jennifer L, Paulus Martin P, Smith Ryan
Laureate Institute for Brain Research, Tulsa, OK.
Oxley College of Health and Natural Sciences, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK.
Res Sq. 2024 Oct 31:rs.3.rs-4682224. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4682224/v1.
Depression and anxiety are common, highly co-morbid conditions associated with a range of learning and decision-making deficits. While the computational mechanisms underlying these deficits have received growing attention, the transdiagnostic vs. diagnosis-specific nature of these mechanisms remains insufficiently characterized. Individuals with affective disorders (iADs; i.e., depression with or without co-morbid anxiety; N=168 and 74, respectively) completed a widely-used decision-making task. To establish diagnostic specificity, we also incorporated data from a sample of individuals with substance use disorders (iSUDs; N=147) and healthy comparisons (HCs; N=54). Computational modeling afforded separate measures of learning and forgetting rates, among other parameters. Compared to HCs, forgetting rates (reflecting recency bias) were elevated in both iADs and iSUDs ( = 0.007, = 0.022). In contrast, iADs showed faster learning rates for negative outcomes than iSUDs ( = 0.027, = 0.017), but they did not differ from HCs. Other model parameters associated with learning and information-seeking also showed suggestive relationships with early adversity and impulsivity. Our findings demonstrate distinct differences in learning and forgetting rates between iSUDs, iADs, and HCs, suggesting that different cognitive processes are affected in these conditions. These differences in decision-making processes and their correlations with symptom dimensions suggest that one could specifically develop interventions that target changing forgetting rates and/or learning from negative outcomes. These results pave the way for replication studies to confirm these relationships and establish their clinical implications.
抑郁和焦虑很常见,是高度共病的状况,与一系列学习和决策缺陷相关。虽然这些缺陷背后的计算机制已受到越来越多的关注,但这些机制的跨诊断与诊断特异性性质仍未得到充分表征。患有情感障碍的个体(iADs;即伴有或不伴有共病焦虑的抑郁症;分别为N = 168和74)完成了一项广泛使用的决策任务。为了确定诊断特异性,我们还纳入了来自物质使用障碍个体样本(iSUDs;N = 147)和健康对照组(HCs;N = 54)的数据。计算建模提供了学习率和遗忘率等参数的单独测量值。与HCs相比,iADs和iSUDs的遗忘率(反映近因偏差)均升高(P = 0.007,P = 0.022)。相比之下,iADs在负面结果上的学习速度比iSUDs快(P = 0.027,P = 0.017),但与HCs没有差异。与学习和信息寻求相关的其他模型参数也显示出与早期逆境和冲动性之间存在暗示性的关系。我们的研究结果表明,iSUDs、iADs和HCs在学习率和遗忘率上存在明显差异,这表明在这些情况下不同的认知过程受到了影响。决策过程中的这些差异及其与症状维度的相关性表明,可以专门开发针对改变遗忘率和/或从负面结果中学习的干预措施。这些结果为复制研究铺平了道路,以证实这些关系并确定其临床意义。