Cited by 85Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Increased decision thresholds enhance information gathering performance in juvenile Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD)

Open access
Hauser, Tobias U., Moutoussis, Michael, Iannaccone, Reto, Brem, Silvia, Walitza, Susanne, Drechsler, Renate, Dayan, Peter, Dolan, Raymond J.·2017·PLOS Computational Biology

Abstract

Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be described as cautious and hesitant, manifesting an excessive indecisiveness that hinders efficient decision making.However, excess caution in decision making may also lead to better performance in specific situations where the cost of extended deliberation is small.We compared 16 juvenile OCD patients with 16 matched healthy controls whilst they performed a sequential information gathering task under different external cost conditions.We found that patients with OCD outperformed healthy controls, winning significantly more points.The groups also differed in the number of draws required prior to committing to a decision, but not in decision accuracy.A novel Bayesian computational model revealed that subjective sampling costs arose as a non-linear function of sampling, closely resembling an escalating urgency signal.Group difference in performance was best explained by a later emergence of these subjective costs in the OCD group, also evident in an increased decision threshold.Our findings present a novel computational model and suggest that enhanced information gathering in OCD can be accounted for by a higher decision threshold arising out of an altered perception of costs that, in some specific contexts, may be advantageous. Author summaryPatients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) report to suffer from indecisiveness and overly cautious decision making.Although many studies captured such a bias experimentally, little is known about the cognitive mechanisms driving such an indecisiveness.In this study, we investigated 16 juvenile OCD patients and compared their performance

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005440

Cites

77 of 77 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [1]WHO. ICD-10 International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision; Chapter V: Mental and Behavioral Disorders. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005.
  2. [21]Delmo C, Weiffenbach O, Stalder C, Poustka F. Diagnostisches Interview Kiddie- Sads-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) 5. Auflage der deutschen Forschungsversion, erweitert um ICD-10-Diagnostik.[5th edition of the Germanresearch version with the addition of ICD-10-diagnosis]. Frankfurt: Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie des Kindes- und Jugendalters; 2001.
  3. [26]Watkins CJCH. Learning from delayed rewards [Internet]. King’s College, Cambridge. 1989. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christopher_Watkins2/publication/33784417_Learning_from_delayed_rewards_/links/53fe12e10cf21edafd142e03.pdf
  4. [27]Watkins CJCH, Dayan P. Q-learning. Mach Learn. 1992; 8: 279– 292.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hauser, T. U., Moutoussis, M., Iannaccone, R., Brem, S., Walitza, S., Drechsler, R., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit (GB)
Corresponding author
Hauser, Tobias U.
Venue
PLOS Computational Biology
Published
2017-04-12
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
e1005440
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W2607053545
Cited by
85
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1
FWCI
11.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (098362/Z/12/Z, 095844/Z/11/Z, 091593/Z/10/Z)
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (320030_130237, 151641)
  • Hartmann Muller (1460)
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, decision threshold, information gathering, sequential sampling, indecision, decision-making, perceived cost
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Bayes Theorem, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Risk-Taking, Models, Statistical

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