Cited by 37Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

A neurocomputational account of reward and novelty processing and effects of psychostimulants in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Open access
Sethi, Arjun, Voon, Valerie, Critchley, Hugo D, Cercignani, Mara, Harrison, Neil A·2018·Brain

Abstract

Computational models of reinforcement learning have helped dissect discrete components of reward-related function and characterize neurocognitive deficits in psychiatric illnesses. Stimulus novelty biases decision-making, even when unrelated to choice outcome, acting as if possessing intrinsic reward value to guide decisions toward uncertain options. Heightened novelty seeking is characteristic of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, yet how this influences reward-related decision-making is computationally encoded, or is altered by stimulant medication, is currently uncertain. Here we used an established reinforcement-learning task to model effects of novelty on reward-related behaviour during functional MRI in 30 adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and 30 age-, sex- and IQ-matched control subjects. Each participant was tested on two separate occasions, once ON and once OFF stimulant medication. OFF medication, patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder showed significantly impaired task performance (P = 0.027), and greater selection of novel options (P = 0.004). Moreover, persistence in selecting novel options predicted impaired task performance (P = 0.025). These behavioural deficits were accompanied by a significantly lower learning rate (P = 0.011) and heightened novelty signalling within the substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (family-wise error corrected P < 0.05). Compared to effects in controls, stimulant medication improved attention deficit hyperactivity disorder participants' overall task performance (P = 0.011), increased reward-learning rates (P = 0.046) and enhanced their ability to differentiate optimal from non-optimal novel choices (P = 0.032). It also reduced substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area responses to novelty. Preliminary cross-sectional evidence additionally suggested an association between long-term stimulant treatment and a reduction in the rewarding value of novelty. These data suggest that aberrant substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area novelty processing plays an important role in the suboptimal reward-related decision-making characteristic of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Compared to effects in controls, abnormalities in novelty processing and reward-related learning were improved by stimulant medication, suggesting that they may be disorder-specific targets for the pharmacological management of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms.

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 · 10.1093/brain/awy048

Cites

81 of 81 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?

  • Stimulant medications can improve task performance and reward-learning rates in ADHD patients by modulating dopaminergic activity.

    “This is further validated by the findings that stimulant medications can improve task performance and reward-learning rates in ADHD patients by specifically modulating dopaminergic activity in the brain [20].”

    From The Impact of Social Media &amp; Technology on Child and Adolescent Mental Health (2025) · cites this paper as [20]

    The Results (Behavioural responses) report improved task performance in ADHD participants relative to controls, and the Discussion describes a tendency for stimulant medication to improve reward-learning rates, with statistical qualifications. But the Discussion says the learning-rate effects may be mediated through noradrenergic mechanisms; it does not establish that the improvements occur specifically through dopaminergic modulation. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Barr CL, Wigg KG, Bloom S, Schachar R, Tannock R, Roberts W, Further evidence from haplotype analysis for linkage of the dopamine D4 receptor gene and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Med Genet 2000; 96: 262– 7. 10898896
  2. Eisenberg J, Zohar A, Mei-Tal G, Steinberg A, Tartakovsky E, Gritsenko I, A haplotype relative risk study of the dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) exon III repeat polymorphism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Am J Med Genet 2000; 96: 258– 61. 10898895
  3. Tomitaka M, Tomitaka S, Otuka Y, Kim K, Matuki H, Sakamoto K, Association between novelty seeking and dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) exon III polymorphism in Japanese subjects. Am J Med Genet 1999; 88: 469– 71. 10490700

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sethi, A., Voon, V., Critchley, H. D., Cercignani, M., & Harrison, N. A.
Affiliations
  • Brighton and Sussex Medical School (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Sethi, Arjun
Venue
Brain
Published
2018-03-13
Volume
141
Issue
5
Pages
1545-1557
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2792577143
Cited by
36
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3
FWCI
2.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (093881, 093881/Z/10/Z)
  • Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
  • Dr Mortimer and Theresa Sackler Foundation
  • Medical Research Council (MR/P008747/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, novelty seeking, reward processing, stimulus novelty, reinforcement learning, psychostimulants, stimulant medication, substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area, learning rate, decision-making, computational modelling, neurocognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Choice Behavior, Cross-Sectional Studies, Double-Blind Method, Exploratory Behavior, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Methylphenidate, Models, Neurological, Photic Stimulation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reward, Task Performance and Analysis, Case-Control Studies, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Recognition, 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