Optimizing vs. matching: response strategy in a probabilistic learning task is associated with negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

Department of Psychiatry, Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, PO Box 21247, Baltimore, MD 21228, USA.
Schizophrenia Research (Impact Factor: 4.59). 01/2011; 127(1-3):215-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2010.12.003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Previous research indicates that behavioral performance in simple probability learning tasks can be organized into response strategy classifications that are thought to predict important personal characteristics and individual differences. Typically, relatively small proportion of subjects can be identified as optimizers for effectively exploiting the environment and choosing the more rewarding stimulus nearly all of the time. In contrast, the vast majority of subjects behaves sub-optimally and adopts the matching or super-matching strategy, apportioning their responses in a way that matches or slightly exceeds the probabilities of reinforcement. In the present study, we administered a two-choice probability learning paradigm to 51 individuals with schizophrenia (SZ) and 29 healthy controls (NC) to examine whether there are differences in the proportion of subjects falling into these response strategy classifications, and to determine whether task performance is differentially associated with symptom severity and neuropsychological functioning. Although the sample of SZ patients did not differ from NC in overall rate of learning or end performance, significant clinical differences emerged when patients were divided into optimizing, super-matching and matching subgroups based upon task performance. Patients classified as optimizers, who adopted the most advantageous learning strategy, exhibited higher levels of positive and negative symptoms than their matching and super-matching counterparts. Importantly, when both positive and negative symptoms were considered together, only negative symptom severity was a significant predictor of whether a subject would behave optimally, with each one standard deviation increase in negative symptoms increasing the odds of a patient being an optimizer by as much as 80%. These data provide a rare example of a greater clinical impairment being associated with better behavioral performance.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present review article summarizes and expands upon the discussions that were initiated during a meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS; A major goal of the CNTRICS meeting was to identify experimental procedures and measures that can be used in laboratory animals to assess psychological constructs that are related to the psychopathology of schizophrenia. The issues discussed in this review reflect the deliberations of the Motivation Working Group of the CNTRICS meeting, which included most of the authors of this article as well as additional participants. After receiving task nominations from the general research community, this working group was asked to identify experimental procedures in laboratory animals that can assess aspects of reinforcement learning and motivation that may be relevant for research on the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, as well as other disorders characterized by deficits in reinforcement learning and motivation. The tasks described here that assess reinforcement learning are the Autoshaping Task, Probabilistic Reward Learning Tasks, and the Response Bias Probabilistic Reward Task. The tasks described here that assess motivation are Outcome Devaluation and Contingency Degradation Tasks and Effort-Based Tasks. In addition to describing such methods and procedures, the present article provides a working vocabulary for research and theory in this field, as well as an industry perspective about how such tasks may be used in drug discovery. It is hoped that this review can aid investigators who are conducting research in this complex area, promote translational studies by highlighting shared research goals and fostering a common vocabulary across basic and clinical fields, and facilitate the development of medications for the treatment of symptoms mediated by reinforcement learning and motivational deficits.
    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 08/2013; · 10.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract This article presents a very simple definition of executive functioning (EF). Although EF is traditionally understood as a cognitive function dependent upon top-down cortical control, we challenge this model. We propose that the functional architecture of the brain evolved to meet the needs of interactive behavior and that cognition develops to control the motor system, which is of paramount importance in adaptation, essentially a manifestation of EF. We propose that traditional models of cognition are incomplete characterizations of EF and that procedural learning and "automatic" behaviors are the most basic, bottom-up functions that support all EF. We propose that motor development in children demonstrates how all knowledge is grounded in sensorimotor interaction and how interactive behavior generates both procedural and declarative knowledge, which later interact to generate EF. This model emphasizes the critical importance of motor behavior in children and stresses the importance of the pediatric motor examination in understanding the development of EF. This model also has implications for why traditional tests of EF have little predictive validity in both children and adults.
    Applied neuropsychology. Child. 2(2):104-115.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abnormalities in reinforcement learning are a key finding in schizophrenia and have been proposed to be linked to elevated levels of dopamine neurotransmission. Behavioral deficits in reinforcement learning and their neural correlates may contribute to the formation of clinical characteristics of schizophrenia. The ability to form predictions about future outcomes is fundamental for environmental interactions and depends on neuronal teaching signals, like reward prediction errors. While aberrant prediction errors, that encode non-salient events as surprising, have been proposed to contribute to the formation of positive symptoms, a failure to build neural representations of decision values may result in negative symptoms. Here, we review behavioral and neuroimaging research in schizophrenia and focus on studies that implemented reinforcement learning models. In addition, we discuss studies that combined reinforcement learning with measures of dopamine. Thereby, we suggest how reinforcement learning abnormalities in schizophrenia may contribute to the formation of psychotic symptoms and may interact with cognitive deficits. These ideas point toward an interplay of more rigid versus flexible control over reinforcement learning. Pronounced deficits in the flexible or model-based domain may allow for a detailed characterization of well-established cognitive deficits in schizophrenia patients based on computational models of learning. Finally, we propose a framework based on the potentially crucial contribution of dopamine to dysfunctional reinforcement learning on the level of neural networks. Future research may strongly benefit from computational modeling but also requires further methodological improvement for clinical group studies. These research tools may help to improve our understanding of disease-specific mechanisms and may help to identify clinically relevant subgroups of the heterogeneous entity schizophrenia.
    Frontiers in Psychiatry 01/2013; 4:172.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 29, 2014