Cited by 104Schizophrenia research and treatmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Reduced model-based decision-making in schizophrenia.

Open access
Culbreth, Adam J., Westbrook, Andrew, Daw, Nathaniel D., Botvinick, Matthew, Barch, Deanna M.·2016·Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Abstract

Individuals with schizophrenia have a diminished ability to use reward history to adaptively guide behavior. However, tasks traditionally used to assess such deficits often rely on multiple cognitive and neural processes, leaving etiology unresolved. In the current study, we adopted recent computational formalisms of reinforcement learning to distinguish between model-based and model-free decision-making in hopes of specifying mechanisms associated with reinforcement-learning dysfunction in schizophrenia. Under this framework, decision-making is model-free to the extent that it relies solely on prior reward history, and model-based if it relies on prospective information such as motivational state, future consequences, and the likelihood of obtaining various outcomes. Model-based and model-free decision-making was assessed in 33 schizophrenia patients and 30 controls using a 2-stage 2-alternative forced choice task previously demonstrated to discern individual differences in reliance on the 2 forms of reinforcement-learning. We show that, compared with controls, schizophrenia patients demonstrate decreased reliance on model-based decision-making. Further, parameter estimates of model-based behavior correlate positively with IQ and working memory measures, suggesting that model-based deficits seen in schizophrenia may be partially explained by higher-order cognitive deficits. These findings demonstrate specific reinforcement-learning and decision-making deficits and thereby provide valuable insights for understanding disordered behavior in schizophrenia. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/abn0000164

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Culbreth, A. J., Westbrook, A., Daw, N. D., Botvinick, M., & Barch, D. M.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Published
2016-08
Volume
125
Issue
6
Pages
777-787
ISSN
  • 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1846
OpenAlex
W2379192565
Cited by
104
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4
FWCI
10.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH066031)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
schizophrenia, model-based decision making, reinforcement learning, reward history, computational psychiatry, working memory, IQ, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Adult, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Individuality, Male, Models, Psychological, Reward, Schizophrenic Psychology

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