Cited by 26Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Altered response to risky decisions and reward in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder

Open access
Moreira, Pedro Silva, Macoveanu, Julian, Marques, Paulo, Coelho, Ana, Magalhães, Ricardo, Siebner, Hartwig R., Soares, José Miguel, Sousa, Nuno +1 more·2020·Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience

Abstract

Background: Patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) employ ritualistic behaviours to reduce or even neutralize the anxiety provoked by their obsessions. The presence of excessive rumination and indecision has motivated the view of OCD as a disorder of decision-making. Most studies have focused on the “cold,” cognitive aspects of decision-making. This study expands current understanding of OCD by characterizing the abnormalities associated with affective, or “hot” decision-making. Methods: We performed a functional MRI study in a sample of 34 patients with OCD and 33 sex- and age-matched healthy controls, during which participants made 2-choice gambles taking varying levels of risk. Results: During risky decisions, patients showed significantly reduced task-related activation in the posterior cingulum, lingual gyrus and anterior cingulate cortex. We identified significant group × risk interactions in the calcarine cortex, precuneus, amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex. During the outcome phase, patients with OCD showed stronger activation of the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex and putamen in response to unexpected losses. Limitations: The group of patients not receiving medication was very small ( n = 5), which precluded us from assessing the effect of medication on risk-taking behaviour in these patients. Conclusion: Obsessive–compulsive disorder is associated with abnormal brain activity patterns during risky decision-making in a set of brain regions that have been consistently implicated in the processing of reward prediction errors. Alterations in affective “hot” processes implicated in decision-making may contribute to increased indecisiveness and intolerance to uncertainty in patients with OCD.

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 · 10.1503/jpn.180226

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • OCD is associated with underactivation of NAcc and OFC during reward anticipation and reward-based decision-making, and with poorer reward-based decision-making and reward-learning performance.

    “Several studies have also reported underactivation of the NAcc and OFC during anticipation of reward (but not during anticipation of punishment) and during reward-based decision-making [136, 143–145] as well as poorer performance on reward-based decision-making and reward-learning tasks [146–147].”

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: 1

  1. Abramowitz JS, Taylor S, McKay D. Obsessive-compulsive disor- der. Lancet 2009;374:491-9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moreira, P. S., Macoveanu, J., Marques, P., Coelho, A., Magalhães, R., Siebner, H. R., Soares, J. M., Sousa, N., & Morgado, P.
Affiliations
University of Copenhagen (DK)
Venue
Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience
Published
2020-03
Volume
45
Issue
2
Pages
98-107
ISSN
  • 1180-4882 (ISSN-L)
  • 1488-2434
OpenAlex
W2988411889
Cited by
26
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Lundbeckfonden (R186-2015-2138)
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF14OC0011413)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, risky decision making, reward prediction error, emotional decision-making, gambling, anterior cingulate cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, posterior cingulum, precuneus, calcarine cortex, putamen, indecision, intolerance of uncertainty, brain activation
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Brain, Decision Making, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neural Pathways, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Occipital Lobe, Parietal Lobe, Reward, Risk-Taking, Young Adult, Functional Neuroimaging

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