Cited by 163Eating Disorders and BehaviorsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

On weight and waiting: delay discounting in anorexia nervosa pretreatment and posttreatment

Open access
Decker, Johannes Hugo, Figner, Bernd, Steinglass, Joanna E.·2015·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN) override the drive to eat, forgoing immediate rewards in favor of longer-term goals. We examined delay discounting and its neural correlates in AN before and after treatment to test a potential mechanism of illness persistence.Methods Inpatients with AN (n = 59) and healthy control subjects (HC, n = 39) performed a delay discounting task at two time points. A subset (n = 30 AN, n = 22 HC) participated in functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning during the task. The task consisted of a range of monetary choices with variable delay times, yielding individual discount rates-the rate by which money loses value over time.Results Before treatment, the AN group showed a preference for delayed over earlier rewards (i.e., less steep discount rates) compared with HC; after weight restoration, AN did not differ from HC. Underweight AN showed slower response times for earlier versus delayed choices; this reversed with treatment. Underweight AN showed abnormal neural activity in striatum and dorsal anterior cingulate; normalization of behavior was associated with increased activation in reward regions (striatum and dorsal anterior cingulate) and decision-making regions (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex).Conclusions The undernourished state of AN may amplify the tendency to forgo immediate rewards in favor of longer-term goals. The results suggest that behavior that looks phenotypically like excessive self-control does not correspond with enhanced prefrontal recruitment. Rather, the results point to alterations in cingulostriatal circuitry that offer new insights on the potential role of abnormalities in decision-making neural systems in the perpetuation of AN.

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 · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2014.12.016

Cites

51 of 51 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?

  • AN patients have altered frontostriatal activation on executive function tasks including the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task and delay discounting.

    “Similarly, AN patients have also been shown to have altered frontostriatal activation on executive function tasks, including the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (Lao-Kaim et al., 2015), and delay discounting (Wierenga et al., 2014; Decker et al., 2015).”
  • Not only has heightened DD been correlated with health and disorder-related outcomes, but lower-than-average discount rates have also been associated with pathology (e.g., anorexia).

    “not only has heightened DD been correlated with health and disorder-related outcomes, but lower-than-average discount rates have also been associated with pathology (e.g., anorexia; Decker, Figner, & Steinglass, 2015).”

    From Behavioral trainings and manipulations to reduce delay discounting: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as Decker, Figner, & Steinglass, 2015

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Decker, J. H., Figner, B., & Steinglass, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Decker, Johannes Hugo
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
78
Issue
9
Pages
606-614
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2110534460
Cited by
163
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9
FWCI
17.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH076195)
  • National Science Foundation (NSF SES–0922743, PA001–115327)
  • National Institutes of Health (T32GM007739)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
anorexia nervosa, delay discounting, impulsivity, weight restoration, striatum, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, decision-making, treatment response
MeSH terms
Adult, Anorexia Nervosa, Body Weight, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Reward, Body Mass Index, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult, Delay Discounting

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