Dataset Information

Effects of Total and Partial Sleep Deprivation on Reflection Impulsivity and Risk-Taking in Deliberative Decision-Making.

ABSTRACT: Study ObjectivesTo evaluate the effects of total and partial sleep deprivation on reflection impulsivity and risk-taking in tasks requiring deliberative decision-making processes.Participants and MethodsSeventy-four healthy young adults were selected to participate in two independent experiments, each consisting of a crossover design. In Experiment 1, 32 participants were tested after one night of regular sleep (RS), and after one night of total sleep deprivation (TSD). In Experiment 2, 42 participants were tested following five nights of RS and after five nights of partial sleep deprivation (PSD), implying five hours of sleep per night. In both the experiments, two deliberative decision-making tasks were administered, involving different decision-making constructs. The Mosaic Task (MT) assessed reflection impulsivity, the tendency to gather information before making a decision. The Columbia Card Task cold version (CCTc) evaluated risk-taking propensity in a dynamic environment.ResultsUnlike TSD, PSD led to an increment of reflection impulsivity and risk-taking. Nevertheless, analyses taking into account the individuals’ baseline (RS) performance showed consistent results between the two experimental sleep manipulations. Participants who gathered more information to make decisions in the MT when well-rested, then relied on less evidence under sleep loss, and more cautious participants in the CCTc tended to make riskier decisions.ConclusionResults pointed to differential consequences of sleep deprivation depending on the habitual way to respond during decision-making involving deliberative reasoning processes. Results were interpreted according to a putative interaction between sleep loss effect and individual difference factors.

SUBMITTER: Salfi F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7261660 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study objectivesTo better understand the sometimes catastrophic effects of sleep loss on naturalistic decision making, we investigated effects of sleep deprivation on decision making in a reversal learning paradigm requiring acquisition and updating of information based on outcome feedback.DesignSubjects were randomized to a sleep deprivation or control condition, with performance testing at baseline, after 2 nights of total sleep deprivation (or rested control), and following 2 nights of recovery sleep. Subjects performed a decision task involving initial learning of go and no go response sets followed by unannounced reversal of contingencies, requiring use of outcome feedback for decisions. A working memory scanning task and psychomotor vigilance test were also administered.SettingSix consecutive days and nights in a controlled laboratory environment with continuous behavioral monitoring.SubjectsTwenty-six subjects (22-40 y of age; 10 women).InterventionsThirteen subjects were randomized to a 62-h total sleep deprivation condition; the others were controls.Measurements and resultsUnlike controls, sleep deprived subjects had difficulty with initial learning of go and no go stimuli sets and had profound impairment adapting to reversal. Skin conductance responses to outcome feedback were diminished, indicating blunted affective reactions to feedback accompanying sleep deprivation. Working memory scanning performance was not significantly affected by sleep deprivation. And although sleep deprived subjects showed expected attentional lapses, these could not account for impairments in reversal learning decision making.ConclusionsSleep deprivation is particularly problematic for decision making involving uncertainty and unexpected change. Blunted reactions to feedback while sleep deprived underlie failures to adapt to uncertainty and changing contingencies. Thus, an error may register, but with diminished effect because of reduced affective valence of the feedback or because the feedback is not cognitively bound with the choice. This has important implications for understanding and managing sleep loss-induced cognitive impairment in emergency response, disaster management, military operations, and other dynamic real-world settings with uncertain outcomes and imperfect information.

Project description:Most of our daily decisions are governed by one of two systems: an impulsive system driving instantaneous decisions and a deliberative system driving thoughtful ones. The impulsive system reacts to immediately available concrete rewards. In contrast, the deliberative system reacts to more delayed rewards and/or punishments, which imposes consideration of longer-term choice consequences. Contingency management for addiction treatment is hypothesized to engage deliberative processes. Ultimately, in both decision-making situations, an action is needed to enact the decision. Whether those actions differ in implementation is an open question whose answer could inform as to whether distinct neural systems are engaged. To explore whether there is evidence of separate mechanisms between deliberated and immediate choices, we trained monkeys to perform a decision-making task where they made a choice on a touch screen between two visual cues predicting different amounts of reward. In immediate choice (IC) trials, the cues appeared at the final response locations where subjects could immediately touch the chosen cue. In deliberated choice (DC) trials, compound cues appeared orthogonally to the response locations. After a delay, allowing for decision formation, an identifying cue component was displaced to the randomly assigned response locations, permitting subjects to reach for the chosen cue. Both trial types showed an effect of cue value on cue selection time. However, only IC trials showed an effect of the competing cue on response vigor (measured by movement duration) and a reach trajectory that deviated in the direction of the competing cue, suggesting a decision reexamination process. Reward modulation of response vigor implicates dopaminergic mechanisms. In DC trials, reach trajectories revealed a commitment to the chosen choice target, and reach vigor was not modulated by the value of the competing cue. Our results suggest that choice-action dynamics are shaped by competing offers only during instantaneous, impulsive choice. After a deliberated decision, choice-action dynamics are unaffected by the alternative offer cue, demonstrating a commitment to the choice. The potential relevance to contingency management is discussed.

Project description:Aims: Chronic cannabis users show impairments on laboratory measures of decision making which reflect risk factors for initiation and continued use of cannabis. However, the differential sensitivity of these tasks to cannabis use has not been established. Moreover, studies to date have often lacked assessment of psychiatric histories and use of other illicit substances, both of which may influence decision making outcomes. The current study aimed to address these limitations by (1) including multiple types of decision making tasks, (2) implementing the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task, a measure of decision making under uncertainty, for the first time in cannabis users, (3) including young adult cannabis users with no other psychiatric disorders, and (4) conducting urinalysis to exclude users of other illicit drugs. Methods: Thirty-three current cannabis users without comorbid psychiatric disorders and 35 cannabis non-users completed behavioral measures of decision-making (Iowa Gambling Task), reward discounting (Delay Discounting Task), choice-outcome learning (the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task) and a questionnaire assessment of impulsivity (Barratt Impulsiveness Scale). Results: Relative to non-users, cannabis users demonstrated greater preference for immediate vs. delayed rewards on the Delay Discounting Task, made fewer advantageous decisions on the Iowa Gambling Task, and endorsed greater impulsivity on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale scales. Cannabis users and non-users showed comparable performance on the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task. Frequency of past-month cannabis use and total years of use did not predict decision making or impulsivity. Conclusions: Young adult cannabis users demonstrated higher discounting rates and impairments in learning cost-benefit contingencies, while reversal learning was unaffected. Self-reported impulsivity was elevated as well. None of these measures correlated with current or lifetime estimates of cannabis use, arguing against a dose-relationship. Interventions that target improvement in affected components of decision making may be helpful in reducing cannabis use and relapse.

Dataset Information

Effects of Total and Partial Sleep Deprivation on Reflection Impulsivity and Risk-Taking in Deliberative Decision-Making.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure