Cited by 19Schizophrenia research and treatmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

A Transdiagnostic Study of Effort-Cost Decision-Making in Psychotic and Mood Disorders

Open access
Culbreth, Adam J, Moran, Erin K, Mahaphanit, Wasita, Erickson, Molly A, Boudewyn, Megan A, Frank, Michael J, Barch, Deanna M, MacDonald, Angus W +5 more·2024·Schizophrenia Bulletin

Abstract

Background: Research suggests that effort-cost decision-making (ECDM), the estimation of work required to obtain reward, may be a relevant framework for understanding motivational impairment in psychotic and mood pathology. Specifically, research has suggested that people with psychotic and mood pathology experience effort as more costly than controls, and thus pursue effortful goals less frequently. This study examined ECDM across psychotic and mood pathology. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that patient groups would show reduced willingness to expend effort compared to controls. Study Design: People with schizophrenia (N = 33), schizoaffective disorder (N = 28), bipolar disorder (N = 39), major depressive disorder (N = 40), and controls (N = 70) completed a physical ECDM task. Participants decided between completing a low-effort or high-effort option for small or larger rewards, respectively. Reward magnitude, reward probability, and effort magnitude varied trial-by-trial. Data were analyzed using standard and hierarchical logistic regression analyses to assess the subject-specific contribution of various factors to choice. Negative symptoms were measured with a clinician-rated interview. Study Results: There was a significant effect of group, driven by reduced choice of high-effort options in schizophrenia. Hierarchical logistic regression revealed that reduced choice of high-effort options in schizophrenia was driven by weaker contributions of probability information. Use of reward information was inversely associated with motivational impairment in schizophrenia. Surprisingly, individuals with major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder did not differ from controls. Conclusions: Our results provide support for ECDM deficits in schizophrenia. Additionally, differences between groups in ECDM suggest a seemingly similar behavioral phenotype, reduced motivation, could arise from disparate mechanisms.

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/schbul/sbad155

Cites

44 of 44 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 transdiagnostic study investigating effort-cost-decision-making in schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, MDD, and bipolar disorder reported that use of reward information was negatively associated with motivational impairments in schizophrenia, whereas the other patient groups did not differ from healthy people.

    “A transdiagnostic study investigating effort–cost–decision-making in schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, MDD, and bipolar disorder reported that use of reward information was negatively associated with motivational impairments in schizophrenia, whereas the other patient groups did not differ from healthy people.83”

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
Culbreth, A. J., Moran, E. K., Mahaphanit, W., Erickson, M. A., Boudewyn, M. A., Frank, M. J., Barch, D. M., MacDonald, A. W., Ragland, J. D., Luck, S. J., Silverstein, S. M., Carter, C. S., & Gold, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Culbreth, Adam J
Venue
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Published
2023-10-30
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
339-348
ISSN
  • 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1701
OpenAlex
W4388014055
Cited by
19
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4
FWCI
3.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH084821, K23 MH126986)
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
effort-based decision making
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Motivation, Psychotic Disorders, Reward, Schizophrenia, Mood Disorders

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