bioRxiv ScienceSearch

Biology subjects

Geurts, D. E. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Geurts, D. E. M..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Catecholamine Challenge Uncovers Distinct Mechanisms For Direct Versus Indirect, But Not Social Versus Non-Social, Learning

Evidence that social and individual learning are at least partially dissociable sustains the belief that humans possess adaptive specialisations for social learning. However, in most extant paradigms, social information comprises an indirect source that can be used to supplement ones own, direct, experience. Thus, social and individual learning differ both in terms of social nature (social versus non-social) and directness (indirect versus direct). To test whether the dissociation between social and individual learning is best explained in terms of social nature or directness, we used a catecholaminergic challenge known to modulate learning. Two groups completed a decision-making task which required direct learning, from own experience, and indirect learning from an additional source. The groups differed in terms of whether the indirect source was social or non-social. The catecholamine transporter blocker, methylphenidate, affected direct learning by improving adaptation to changes in the volatility of the environment but there was no effect of methylphenidate on learning from the social or non-social indirect source. Thus, we report positive evidence for a dissociable effect of methylphenidate on direct and indirect learning, but no evidence for a distinction between social and non-social. These data fail to support the adaptive specialisation view, instead providing evidence for distinct mechanisms for direct versus indirect learning.

neuroscience

Dopaminergic drug effects on probability weighting during risky decision-making

Dopamine has been associated with risky decision-making, as well as with pathological gambling, a behavioural addiction characterized by excessive risk-taking behaviour. However, the specific mechanisms through which dopamine might act to foster risk-taking and pathological gambling remain elusive. Here we test the hypothesis that this might be achieved, in part, via modulation of subjective probability weighing during decision-making. Healthy controls (n = 21) and pathological gamblers (n = 16) played a decision-making task involving choices between sure monetary options and risky gambles both in the gain and loss domains. Each participant played the task twice, either under placebo or the dopamine D2/D3 receptor antagonist sulpiride, in a double-blind, counter-balanced, design. A prospect theory modelling approach was used to estimate subjective probability weighting and sensitivity to monetary outcomes. Consistent with prospect theory, we found that participants presented a distortion in the subjective weighting of probabilities, i.e. they overweighted low probabilities and underweighted moderate to high probabilities, both in the gain and loss domains. Compared with placebo, sulpiride attenuated this distortion in the gain domain. Across drugs, the groups did not differ in their probability weighting, although in the placebo condition, gamblers consistently underweighted losing probabilities. Overall, our results reveal that dopamine D2/D3 receptor antagonism modulates the subjective weighting of probabilities in the gain domain, in the direction of more objective, economically rational decision-making.\n\nSignificance statementDopamine has been implicated in risky decision-making and gambling addiction, but the exact mechanisms underlying this influence remain partly elusive. Here we tested the hypothesis that dopamine modulates subjective probability weighting, by examining the effect of a dopaminergic drug on risk-taking behaviour, both in healthy individuals and pathological gamblers. We found that selectively blocking dopamine D2/D3 receptors diminished the typically observed distortion of winning probabilities, characterized by an overweighting of low probabilities and underweighting of high probabilities. This made participants more linear in their subjective estimation of probabilities, and thus more rational in their decision-making behaviour. Healthy participants and pathological gamblers did not differ in their risk-taking behaviour, except in the placebo condition in which gamblers consistently underweighted losing probabilities.

neuroscience