Cited by 112Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Reinforcement Learning Disruptions in Individuals With Depression and Sensitivity to Symptom Change Following Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

Open access
Brown, Vanessa M., Zhu, Lusha, Solway, Alec, Wang, John M., McCurry, Katherine L., King-Casas, Brooks, Chiu, Pearl H.·2021·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

Importance: Major depressive disorder is prevalent and impairing. Parsing neurocomputational substrates of reinforcement learning in individuals with depression may facilitate a mechanistic understanding of the disorder and suggest new cognitive therapeutic targets. Objective: To determine associations among computational model-derived reinforcement learning parameters, depression symptoms, and symptom changes after treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this mixed cross-sectional-cohort study, individuals performed reward and loss variants of a probabilistic learning task during functional magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and follow-up. A volunteer sample with and without a depression diagnosis was recruited from the community. Participants were assessed from July 2011 to February 2017, and data were analyzed from May 2017 to May 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Computational model-based analyses of participants' choices assessed a priori hypotheses about associations between components of reward-based and loss-based learning with depression symptoms. Changes in both learning parameters and symptoms were then assessed in a subset of participants who received cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Results: Of 101 included adults, 69 (68.3%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 34.4 (11.2) years. A total of 69 participants with a depression diagnosis and 32 participants without a depression diagnosis were included at baseline; 48 participants (28 with depression who received CBT and 20 without depression) were included at follow-up (mean [SD] of 115.1 [15.6] days). Computational model-based analyses of behavioral choices and neural data identified associations of learning with symptoms during reward learning and loss learning, respectively. During reward learning only, anhedonia (and not negative affect or arousal) was associated with model-derived learning parameters (learning rate: posterior mean regression β = -0.14; 95% credible interval [CrI], -0.12 to -0.03; outcome sensitivity: posterior mean regression β = 0.18; 95% CrI, 0.02 to 0.37) and neural learning signals (moderation of association between striatal prediction error and expected value signals: t97 = -2.10; P = .04). During loss learning only, negative affect (and not anhedonia or arousal) was associated with learning parameters (outcome shift: posterior mean regression β = -0.11; 95% CrI, -0.20 to -0.01) and disrupted neural encoding of learning signals (association with subgenual anterior cingulate prediction error signals: r = -0.28; P = .005). Symptom improvement following CBT was associated with normalization of learning parameters that were disrupted at baseline (reward learning rate: posterior mean regression β = 0.15; 90% CrI, 0.001 to 0.41; loss outcome shift: posterior mean regression β = 0.42; 90% CrI, 0.09 to 0.77). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the mapping of reinforcement learning components to symptoms of major depression revealed mechanistic features associated with these symptoms and points to possible learning-based therapeutic processes and targets.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.1844

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A standard 12-week course of cognitive-behavioral therapy significantly increased the mathematically modeled reward magnitude sensitivity parameter (win learning rate) in patients with depression, which was initially reduced and expectedly correlated with the severity of anhedonia symptoms by self-report.

    “стандартный двенадцатинедельный курс когнитивно-поведенческой терапии значимо повысил у пациентов с депрессией математически смоделированный параметр чувствительности к величине награды (win learning rate), который у них изначально был снижен и ожидаемо коррелировал с выраженностью симптомов ангедонии по самоотчетам (Brown et al., 2021).”

    From Когнитивные механизмы дисфункционального принятия решений при психических расстройствах (2025) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2021

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. [1]Kessler RC, Chiu WT, Demler O, Merikangas KR, Walters EE. Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005; 62(6): 617- 627. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617 15939839 PMC2847357 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]Stephan KE, Bach DR, Fletcher PC,. Charting the landscape of priority problems in psychiatry, part 1: classification and diagnosis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016; 3(1): 77- 83. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00361-2 26573970 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [4]Insel T, Cuthbert B, Garvey M,. Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): toward a new classification framework for research on mental disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2010; 167(7): 748- 751. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.09091379 20595427 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [6]Eshel N, Roiser JP. Reward and punishment processing in depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2010; 68(2): 118- 124. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.01.027 20303067 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [7]Schultz W, Dayan P, Montague PR. A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science. 1997; 275(5306): 1593- 1599. doi: 10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 9054347 · DOI · Paper page
  6. [8]Montague PR, Dayan P, Sejnowski TJ. A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning. J Neurosci. 1996; 16(5): 1936- 1947. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.16-05-01936.1996 8774460 PMC6578666 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [9]Sutton RS, Barto AG. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press; 1998.
  8. [11]Robinson OJ, Chase HW. Learning and choice in mood disorders: searching for the computational parameters of anhedonia. Comput Psychiatr. 2017; 1(1): 208- 233. doi: 10.1162/CPSY_a_00009 29400358 PMC5796642 · DOI
  9. [12]Chiu PH, Deldin PJ. Neural evidence for enhanced error detection in major depressive disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2007; 164(4): 608- 616. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.4.608 17403974 · DOI
  10. [13]Cavanagh JF, Bismark AW, Frank MJ, Allen JJB. Multiple dissociations between comorbid depression and anxiety on reward and punishment processing: evidence from computationally informed EEG. Comput Psychiatr. 2019; 3: 1- 17. doi: 10.1162/CPSY_a_00024 31149639 PMC6515849 · DOI
  11. [14]Pizzagalli DA, Iosifescu D, Hallett LA, Ratner KG, Fava M. Reduced hedonic capacity in major depressive disorder: evidence from a probabilistic reward task. J Psychiatr Res. 2008; 43(1): 76- 87. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2008.03.001 18433774 PMC2637997 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [15]Elliott R, Sahakian BJ, Herrod JJ, Robbins TW, Paykel ES. Abnormal response to negative feedback in unipolar depression: evidence for a diagnosis specific impairment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1997; 63(1): 74- 82. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.63.1.74 9221971 PMC2169625 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [17]Rothkirch M, Tonn J, Köhler S, Sterzer P. Neural mechanisms of reinforcement learning in unmedicated patients with major depressive disorder. Brain. 2017; 140(4): 1147- 1157. doi: 10.1093/brain/awx025 28334960 · DOI · Paper page
  14. [18]Luking KR, Pagliaccio D, Luby JL, Barch DM. Child gain approach and loss avoidance behavior: relationships with depression risk, negative mood, and anhedonia. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2015; 54(8): 643- 651. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2015.05.010 26210333 PMC4810675 · DOI
  15. [19]Kumar P, Goer F, Murray L,. Impaired reward prediction error encoding and striatal-midbrain connectivity in depression. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2018; 43(7): 1581- 1588. doi: 10.1038/s41386-018-0032-x 29540863 PMC5983542 · DOI · Paper page
  16. [20]Aylward J, Valton V, Ahn W-Y,. Altered learning under uncertainty in unmedicated mood and anxiety disorders. Nat Hum Behav. 2019; 3(10): 1116- 1123. doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0628-0 31209369 PMC6790140 · DOI
  17. [21]Dombrovski AY, Szanto K, Clark L,. Corticostriatothalamic reward prediction error signals and executive control in late-life depression. Psychol Med. 2015; 45(7): 1413- 1424. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714002517 25319564 PMC4380546 · DOI · Paper page
  18. [22]Gradin VB, Kumar P, Waiter G,. Expected value and prediction error abnormalities in depression and schizophrenia. Brain. 2011; 134(pt 6): 1751- 1764. doi: 10.1093/brain/awr059 21482548 · DOI · Paper page
  19. [23]Rothkirch M, Schmack K, Deserno L, Darmohray D, Sterzer P. Attentional modulation of reward processing in the human brain. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014; 35(7): 3036- 3051. doi: 10.1002/hbm.22383 24307490 PMC6869517 · DOI
  20. [24]Chase HW, Frank MJ, Michael A, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW. Approach and avoidance learning in patients with major depression and healthy controls: relation to anhedonia. Psychol Med. 2010; 40(3): 433- 440. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709990468 19607754 · DOI
  21. [25]Greenberg T, Chase HW, Almeida JR,. Moderation of the relationship between reward expectancy and prediction error-related ventral striatal reactivity by anhedonia in unmedicated major depressive disorder: findings from the EMBARC study. Am J Psychiatry. 2015; 172(9): 881- 891. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.14050594 26183698 PMC4858169 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [27]Gillan CM, Kalanthroff E, Evans M,. Comparison of the association between goal-directed planning and self-reported compulsivity vs obsessive-compulsive disorder diagnosis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020; 77(1): 77- 85. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2998 31596434 PMC6802255 · DOI
  23. [28]Young CB, Chen T, Nusslock R, Keller J, Schatzberg AF, Menon V. Anhedonia and general distress show dissociable ventromedial prefrontal cortex connectivity in major depressive disorder. Transl Psychiatry. 2016; 6(5): e810. doi: 10.1038/tp.2016.80 27187232 PMC5070048 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [29]Harlé KM, Guo D, Zhang S, Paulus MP, Yu AJ. Anhedonia and anxiety underlying depressive symptomatology have distinct effects on reward-based decision-making. PLoS One. 2017; 12(10): e0186473. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186473 29059254 PMC5653291 · DOI
  25. [30]Paulus MP, Huys QJM, Maia TV. A roadmap for the development of applied computational psychiatry. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2016; 1(5): 386- 392. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2016.05.001 28018986 PMC5176268 · DOI
  26. [32]Dichter GS, Felder JN, Petty C, Bizzell J, Ernst M, Smoski MJ. The effects of psychotherapy on neural responses to rewards in major depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2009; 66(9): 886- 897. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.06.021 19726030 PMC3657763 · DOI · Paper page
  27. [33]Heller AS, Johnstone T, Light SN,. Relationships between changes in sustained fronto-striatal connectivity and positive affect in major depression resulting from antidepressant treatment. Am J Psychiatry. 2013; 170(2): 197- 206. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12010014 23223803 PMC3563751 · DOI · Paper page
  28. [34]Webb CA, Auerbach RP, Bondy E, Stanton CH, Appleman L, Pizzagalli DA. Reward-related neural predictors and mechanisms of symptom change in cognitive behavioral therapy for depressed adolescent girls. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2021; 6(1): 39- 49. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.07.010 32948509 PMC7796984 · DOI
  29. [35]Beck AT. The current state of cognitive therapy: a 40-year retrospective. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005; 62(9): 953- 959. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.9.953 16143727 · DOI · Paper page
  30. [36]Roiser JP, Elliott R, Sahakian BJ. Cognitive mechanisms of treatment in depression. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012; 37(1): 117- 136. doi: 10.1038/npp.2011.183 21976044 PMC3238070 · DOI · Paper page
  31. [39]Kring AM, Persons JB, Thomas C. Changes in affect during treatment for depression and anxiety. Behav Res Ther. 2007; 45(8): 1753- 1764. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2007.02.001 17374361 · DOI · Paper page
  32. [43]Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri WF, Beck AT. Dimensions of the Beck Depression Inventory-II in clinically depressed outpatients. J Clin Psychol. 1999; 55(1): 117- 128. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199901)55:1<117::AID-JCLP12>3.0.CO;2-A 10100838 · DOI
  33. [45]Brown VM, Zhu L, Wang JM, Frueh BC, King-Casas B, Chiu PH. Associability-modulated loss learning is increased in posttraumatic stress disorder. Elife. 2018; 7: e30150. doi: 10.7554/eLife.30150 29313489 PMC5760201 · DOI
  34. [47]Chase HW, Kumar P, Eickhoff SB, Dombrovski AY. Reinforcement learning models and their neural correlates: an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2015; 15(2): 435- 459. doi: 10.3758/s13415-015-0338-7 25665667 PMC4437864 · DOI
  35. [48]Rangel A, Camerer C, Montague PR. A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008; 9(7): 545- 556. doi: 10.1038/nrn2357 18545266 PMC4332708 · DOI · Paper page
  36. [50]DeRubeis RJ, Siegle GJ, Hollon SD. Cognitive therapy versus medication for depression: treatment outcomes and neural mechanisms. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008; 9(10): 788- 796. doi: 10.1038/nrn2345 18784657 PMC2748674 · DOI · Paper page
  37. [51]Ahn W-Y, Haines N, Zhang L. Revealing neurocomputational mechanisms of reinforcement learning and decision-making with the hBayesDM package. Comput Psychiatr. 2017; 1: 24- 57. doi: 10.1162/CPSY_a_00002 29601060 PMC5869013 · DOI
  38. [54]Rutledge RB, Moutoussis M, Smittenaar P,. Association of neural and emotional impacts of reward prediction errors with major depression. JAMA Psychiatry. 2017; 74(8): 790- 797. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.1713 28678984 PMC5710549 · DOI · Paper page
  39. [55]Dobson KS, Hollon SD, Dimidjian S,. Randomized trial of behavioral activation, cognitive therapy, and antidepressant medication in the prevention of relapse and recurrence in major depression. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2008; 76(3): 468- 477. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.76.3.468 18540740 PMC2648513 · DOI · Paper page
  40. [56]Chung D, Kadlec K, Aimone JA, McCurry K, King-Casas B, Chiu PH. Valuation in major depression is intact and stable in a non-learning environment. Sci Rep. 2017; 7: 44374. doi: 10.1038/srep44374 28281665 PMC5345037 · DOI
  41. [57]Peeters F, Nicolson NA, Berkhof J, Delespaul P, deVries M. Effects of daily events on mood states in major depressive disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 2003; 112(2): 203- 211. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.112.2.203 12784829 · DOI
  42. [58]Khazanov GK, Ruscio AM, Swendsen J. The “brightening” effect: reactions to positive events in the daily lives of individuals with major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. Behav Ther. 2019; 50(2): 270- 284. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.04.150 30824245 PMC6494459 · DOI
  43. [59]Moutoussis M, Rutledge RB, Prabhu G,. Neural activity and fundamental learning, motivated by monetary loss and reward, are intact in mild to moderate major depressive disorder. PLoS One. 2018; 13(8): e0201451. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201451 30071076 PMC6072018 · DOI
  44. [60]Gelman A, Hill J, Yajima M. Why we (usually) don’t have to worry about multiple comparisons. J Res Educ Eff. 2012; 5: 189- 211. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2011.618213 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, V. M., Zhu, L., Solway, A., Wang, J. M., McCurry, K. L., King-Casas, B., & Chiu, P. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Peking University (CN)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • Department of Psychology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
Corresponding author
Chiu, Pearl H.
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2021-10-01
Volume
78
Issue
10
Pages
1113
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3187005808
Cited by
112
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 3
FWCI
8.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • Center for Research Computing, University of Pittsburgh
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
major depressive disorder, reinforcement learning, computational psychiatry, cognitive behavioral therapy, anhedonia, negative affect, reward learning, outcome sensitivity, learning rate, treatment response, symptom change, functional MRI, computational modeling of choice
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Probability Learning, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Young Adult, Ventral Striatum

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review