Dias Maile Ana Antonia, Gruendler Theo O J, Fischer Adrian G, Kurtenbach Hannah, Kaiser Luca F, Froböse Monja I, Jocham Gerhard
Biological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Center of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Otto Von Guericke University Magdeburg, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106, Magdeburg, Germany.
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2025 May 29. doi: 10.1007/s00213-025-06816-9.
The neuromodulator dopamine is known to play a key role in reward-guided decision making, where choice options are often characterized by multiple attributes. Different decision strategies can be used to merge these choice attributes with personal preferences (e.g., risk preferences) and integrate them into a single subjective value. While the influence of dopamine on risk preferences has been investigated, it is unknown whether dopamine is also involved in arbitrating between decision strategies.
In the present study, we investigate the effects of pharmacological dopamine manipulations on arbitrating between different decision strategies in a healthy sample.
31 healthy male participants performed a reward-guided decision-making task under the influence of the dopamine D/D-receptor antagonist amisulpride (400 mg), the dopamine precursor L-DOPA (100 mg L-DOPA + 25 mg cardidopa), or placebo in a double-blind within-subject design. The effect of dopamine on reward-guided decisions and decision strategies was analyzed using hierarchical implementations of regressions and Bayesian models.
Notably, we observed that the dopaminergic interventions shifted the (overall) weighting of option attributes without changing how option attributes are integrated into a subjective value (decision strategy). These effects were bidirectional: Amisulpride reduced whereas L-DOPA increased the degree to which choices were influenced by both reward magnitude and reward probability. These effects occurred in the absence of changes in statistically optimal behavior.
Together, our data provide evidence for a role of dopamine in controlling the influence of value parameters on choice irrespective of decision strategies.
已知神经调质多巴胺在奖励引导的决策过程中起关键作用，其中选择选项通常具有多个属性。可以使用不同的决策策略将这些选择属性与个人偏好（例如风险偏好）合并，并将它们整合为一个单一的主观价值。虽然已经研究了多巴胺对风险偏好的影响，但尚不清楚多巴胺是否也参与决策策略之间的仲裁。
在本研究中，我们调查了药物性多巴胺操纵对健康样本中不同决策策略之间仲裁的影响。
31名健康男性参与者在双盲的受试者内设计中，在多巴胺D2/D3受体拮抗剂阿立哌唑（400mg）、多巴胺前体左旋多巴（100mg左旋多巴+25mg卡比多巴）或安慰剂的影响下执行奖励引导的决策任务。使用回归和贝叶斯模型的分层实现分析多巴胺对奖励引导决策和决策策略的影响。
值得注意的是，我们观察到多巴胺能干预改变了选项属性的（总体）权重，而没有改变选项属性如何整合为主观价值（决策策略）。这些影响是双向的：阿立哌唑降低了，而左旋多巴增加了选择受奖励幅度和奖励概率影响的程度。这些影响在统计上最优行为没有变化的情况下出现。
总之，我们的数据为多巴胺在控制价值参数对选择的影响方面发挥作用提供了证据，而与决策策略无关。
