CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 61Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Dose-response effects of d-amphetamine on effort-based decision-making and reinforcement learning

Open access
Soder, Heather E., Cooper, Jessica A., Lopez-Gamundi, Paula, Hoots, Jennifer K., Nunez, Cecilia, Lawlor, Victoria M., Lane, Scott D., Treadway, Michael T. +1 more·2021·Neuropsychopharmacology
DOI 10.1038/s41386-020-0779-8PMC PMC8115674
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Effort-related decision-making and reward learning are both dopamine-dependent, but preclinical research suggests they depend on different dopamine signaling dynamics. Therefore, the same dose of a dopaminergic medication could have differential effects on effort for reward vs. reward learning. However, no study has tested how effort and reward learning respond to the same dopaminergic medication within subjects. The current study aimed to test the effect of therapeutic doses of d-amphetamine on effort for reward and reward learning in the same healthy volunteers. Participants (n = 30) completed the Effort Expenditure for Reward Task (EEfRT) measure of effort-related decision-making, and the Probabilistic Reward Task (PRT) measure of reward learning, under placebo and two doses of d-amphetamine (10 mg, and 20 mg). Secondarily, we examined whether the individual characteristics of baseline working memory and willingness to exert effort for reward moderated the effects of d-amphetamine. d-Amphetamine increased willingness to exert effort, particularly at low to intermediate expected values of reward. Computational modeling analyses suggested this was due to decreased effort discounting rather than probability discounting or decision consistency. Both baseline effort and working memory emerged as moderators of this effect, such that d-amphetamine increased effort more in individuals with lower working memory and lower baseline effort, also primarily at low to intermediate expected values of reward. In contrast, d-amphetamine had no significant effect on reward learning. These results have implications for treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which may be characterized by multiple underlying reward dysfunctions.

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 · 10.1038/s41386-020-0779-8

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • In the current review, the cognitive enhancing effects of AMP extended to learning and long-term verbal memory, although results were inconsistent.

    “the current review showed that the cognitive enhancing effects of AMP can also extend to impulse control (de Wit et al., 2002; Dolder et al., 2018), non‐verbal intelligence (Mattay et al., 1996) and learning and long‐term verbal memory (Barch & Carter, 2005; Breitenstein et al., 2006; Soder et al., 2021; Whiting et al., 2007, 2008; Zeeuws et al., 2010a, 2010b; Zeeuws & Soetens, 2007).”

    From Systematic reviews of the acute effects of amphetamine on working memory and other cognitive performances in healthy individuals, with a focus on the potential influence of personality traits (2023) · cites this paper as Soder et al., 2021

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that d-amphetamine did not significantly affect reward learning, contrary to citing this study as evidence of enhanced learning. The paper addresses reward learning, not long-term verbal memory, so it cannot establish that part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • AMP (10 and 20 mg) influences willingness to exert effort based on baseline WM, improving willingness in individuals with lower WM.

    “a recent study reported that AMP (10 and 20 mg) influences willingness to exert effort based on baseline WM, improving willingness in individuals with lower WM”

    From Systematic reviews of the acute effects of amphetamine on working memory and other cognitive performances in healthy individuals, with a focus on the potential influence of personality traits (2023) · cites this paper as Soder et al., 2021

    The Moderators section reports that both 10 mg and 20 mg d-amphetamine increased hard-task choices in participants with lower baseline working memory, but chiefly at low to intermediate expected reward values. It also states that working memory did not moderate the drug’s overall effect on willingness to exert effort. The claim omits that condition and could imply an overall effect. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

1 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cools R, D'Esposito M. Inverted-U-shaped dopamine actions on human working memory and cognitive control. Biol Psychiatry. 2011;69:e113-e125.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Soder, H. E., Cooper, J. A., Lopez-Gamundi, P., Hoots, J. K., Nunez, C., Lawlor, V. M., Lane, S. D., Treadway, M. T., & Wardle, M. C.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Institut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge (ES)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
  • Treadway, Michael T.
  • Wardle, Margaret C.
ORCID
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-07-28
Volume
46
Issue
6
Pages
1078-1085
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
DOI
10.1038/s41386-020-0779-8
PMC
PMC8115674
OpenAlex
W3045658886
Cited by
61
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 4
FWCI
3.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute on Drug Abuse (F32DA048542)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (F32MH115692, R01MH108605, R00MH105305)
  • "la Caixa" Foundation (LCF/BQ/DI19/11730047)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
d-amphetamine, effort-based decision making, effort discounting, reward learning, reinforcement learning, dopamine, probabilistic reward task, working memory, computational modeling, dose-response relationship, neuropsychiatric disorders
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Dextroamphetamine, Humans, Motivation, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward

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