Reliability and Replicability of Implicit and Explicit Reinforcement Learning Paradigms in People With Psychotic Disorders.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Motivational deficits in people with psychosis may be a result of impairments in reinforcement learning (RL). Therefore, behavioral paradigms that can accurately measure these impairments and their change over time are essential.Methods
We examined the reliability and replicability of 2 RL paradigms (1 implicit and 1 explicit, each with positive and negative reinforcement components) given at 2 time points to healthy controls (n = 75), and people with bipolar disorder (n = 62), schizoaffective disorder (n = 60), and schizophrenia (n = 68).Results
Internal consistency was acceptable (mean α = 0.78 ± 0.15), but test-retest reliability was fair to low (mean intraclass correlation = 0.33 ± 0.25) for both implicit and explicit RL. There were no clear effects of practice for these tasks. Largely, performance on these tasks shows intact implicit and impaired explicit RL in psychosis. Symptom presentation did not relate to performance in any robust way.Conclusions
Our findings replicate previous literature showing spared implicit RL and impaired explicit reinforcement in psychosis. This suggests typical basal ganglia dopamine release, but atypical recruitment of the orbitofrontal and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices. However, we found that these tasks have only fair to low test-retest reliability and thus may not be useful for assessing change over time in clinical trials.
SUBMITTER: Pratt DN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8084427 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Motivational and hedonic impairments are core features of a variety of types of psychopathology. An important aspect of motivational function is reinforcement learning (RL), including implicit (i.e., outside of conscious awareness) and explicit (i.e., including explicit representations about potential reward associations) learning, as well as both positive reinforcement (learning about actions that lead to reward) and punishment (learning to avoid actions that lead to loss). Here we present data from paradigms designed to assess both positive and negative components of both implicit and explicit RL, examine performance on each of these tasks among individuals with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder with psychosis, and examine their relative relationships to specific symptom domains transdiagnostically. None of the diagnostic groups differed significantly from controls on the implicit RL tasks in either bias toward a rewarded response or bias away from a punished response. However, on the explicit RL task, both the individuals with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder performed significantly worse than controls, but the individuals with bipolar did not. Worse performance on the explicit RL task, but not the implicit RL task, was related to worse motivation and pleasure symptoms across all diagnostic categories. Performance on explicit RL, but not implicit RL, was related to working memory, which accounted for some of the diagnostic group differences. However, working memory did not account for the relationship of explicit RL to motivation and pleasure symptoms. These findings suggest transdiagnostic relationships across the spectrum of psychotic disorders between motivation and pleasure impairments and explicit RL. (PsycINFO Database Record
| S-EPMC5503766 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Studies of synaptic plasticity using the marine mollusk Aplysia californica as model system have been successfully used to identify proteins involved in learning and memory. The importance of molecular elements regulated by the learning- related neurotransmitter serotonin in Aplysia can then be explored in rodent models and finally tested for their relevance for human physiology and pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Herein, 2-DE gel-based electrophoresis has been used to investigate protein level changes after treatment with serotonin in Aplysia abdominal ganglia. RESULTS:Twenty-one proteins have been found to be regulated by serotonin, and protein level changes of actin depolymerizing factor (ADF), deleted in azoospermia associated protein (DAZAP-1), and Flotillin-1 have been verified by Western blotting. DISCUSSION:Flotillin-1, a member of the flotillin/reggie family of scaffolding proteins, has been previously found to be involved in neuritic branching and synapse formation in hippocampal neurons in vitro. However, its importance for hippocampal- dependent learning and memory in the mouse has not been examined. Here, elevated levels of Flotillin-1 in hippocampal tissue of mice trained in the Morris water maze confirmed the relevance of Flotillin-1 for memory-related processes in a mammalian system. Thus, a translational approach-from invertebrates to rodents-led to the identification of Flotillin-1 as evolutionary-conserved memory-related protein.
| S-EPMC3681089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The controversy over multiple category-learning systems is reminiscent of the controversy over multiple memory systems. Researchers continue to seek paradigms to sharply dissociate explicit category-learning processes (featuring category rules that can be verbalized) from implicit category-learning processes (featuring learned stimulus-response associations that lie outside declarative cognition). We contribute a new dissociative paradigm, adapting the technique of deferred-rearranged reinforcement from comparative psychology. Participants learned matched category tasks that had either a one-dimensional, rule-based solution or a multidimensional, information-integration solution. They received feedback either immediately or after each block of trials, with the feedback organized such that positive outcomes were grouped and negative outcomes were grouped (deferred-rearranged reinforcement). Deferred reinforcement qualitatively eliminated implicit, information-integration category learning. It left intact explicit, rule-based category learning. Moreover, implicit-category learners facing deferred-rearranged reinforcement turned by default and information-processing necessity to rule-based strategies that poorly suited their nominal category task. The results represent one of the strongest explicit-implicit dissociations yet seen in the categorization literature.
| S-EPMC3946254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinicians may use implicit or explicit motor learning approaches to facilitate motor learning of patients with stroke. Implicit motor learning approaches have shown promising results in healthy populations. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an implicit motor learning walking intervention is more effective compared with an explicit motor learning walking intervention delivered at home regarding walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery. This randomized, controlled, single-blind trial was conducted in the home environment. The 79 participants, who were in the chronic phase after stroke (age = 66.4 [SD = 11.0] years; time poststroke = 70.1 [SD = 64.3] months; walking speed = 0.7 [SD = 0.3] m/s; Berg Balance Scale score = 44.5 [SD = 9.5]), were randomly assigned to an implicit (n = 38) or explicit (n = 41) group. Analogy learning was used as the implicit motor learning walking intervention, whereas the explicit motor learning walking intervention consisted of detailed verbal instructions. Both groups received 9 training sessions (30 minutes each), for a period of 3 weeks, targeted at improving quality of walking. The primary outcome was walking speed measured by the 10-Meter Walk Test at a comfortable walking pace. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 1 month postintervention. No statistically or clinically relevant differences between groups were obtained postintervention (between-group difference was estimated at 0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.04 to 0.08] and at follow-up (between-group difference estimated at -0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.09 to 0.05]). Implicit motor learning was not superior to explicit motor learning to improve walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of implicit compared with explicit motor learning on a functional task in people after stroke. Results indicate that physical therapists can use (tailored) implicit and explicit motor learning strategies to improve walking speed in people after stroke who are in the chronic phase of recovery.
| S-EPMC8101354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A meta-analysis of non-human primates performing three different tasks (Object-Match, Category-Match, and Category-Saccade associations) revealed signatures of explicit and implicit learning. Performance improved equally following correct and error trials in the Match (explicit) tasks, but it improved more after correct trials in the Saccade (implicit) task, a signature of explicit versus implicit learning. Likewise, error-related negativity, a marker for error processing, was greater in the Match (explicit) tasks. All tasks showed an increase in alpha/beta (10-30 Hz) synchrony after correct choices. However, only the implicit task showed an increase in theta (3-7 Hz) synchrony after correct choices that decreased with learning. In contrast, in the explicit tasks, alpha/beta synchrony increased with learning and decreased thereafter. Our results suggest that explicit versus implicit learning engages different neural mechanisms that rely on different patterns of oscillatory synchrony.
| S-EPMC5662212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:A significant part of neurological rehabilitation focuses on facilitating the learning of motor skills. Training can adopt either (more) explicit or (more) implicit forms of motor learning. Gait is one of the most practiced motor skills within rehabilitation in people after stroke because it is an important criterion for discharge and requirement for functioning at home. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to describe the design of a randomized controlled study assessing the effects of implicit motor learning compared with the explicit motor learning in gait rehabilitation of people suffering from stroke. METHODS:The study adopts a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study design. People after stroke will be eligible for participation when they are in the chronic stage of recovery (>6 months after stroke), would like to improve walking performance, have a slow walking speed (<1 m/s), can communicate in Dutch, and complete a 3-stage command. People will be excluded if they cannot walk a minimum of 10 m or have other additional impairments that (severely) influence gait. Participants will receive 9 gait-training sessions over a 3-week period and will be randomly allocated to an implicit or explicit group. Therapists are aware of the intervention they provide, and the assessors are blind to the intervention participants receive. Outcome will be assessed at baseline (T0), directly after the intervention (T1), and after 1 month (T2). The primary outcome parameter is walking velocity. Walking performance will be assessed with the 10-meter walking test, Dynamic Gait Index, and while performing a secondary task (dual task). Self-reported measures are the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale, verbal protocol, Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale, and the Global Perceived Effect scale. A process evaluation will take place to identify how the therapy was perceived and identify factors that may have influenced the effectiveness of the intervention. Repeated measures analyses will be conducted to determine significant and clinical relevant differences between groups and over time. RESULTS:Data collection is currently ongoing and results are expected in 2019. CONCLUSIONS:The relevance of the study as well as the advantages and disadvantages of several aspects of the chosen design are discussed, for example, the personalized approach and choice of measurements. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register NTR6272; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6272 (Archived by WebCite http://www.webcitation.org/6ytA937m5). REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER:RR1-10.2196/9595.
| S-EPMC5992456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ability to perform accurate sequential movements is essential to normal motor function. Learning a sequential motor behavior is comprised of two basic components: explicit identification of the order in which the sequence elements should be performed and implicit acquisition of spatial accuracy for each element. Here we investigated the time course of learning of these components for a first sequence (SEQA) and their susceptibility to interference from learning a second sequence (SEQB). We assessed explicit learning with a discrete index, the number of correct anticipatory movements, and implicit learning with a continuous variable, spatial error, which decreased during learning without subject awareness. Spatial accuracy to individual sequence elements reached asymptotic levels only when the whole sequence order was known. Interference with recall of the order of SEQA persisted even when SEQB was learned 24 h after SEQA. However, there was resistance to interference by SEQB with increased initial training with SEQA. For implicit learning of spatial accuracy, SEQB interfered at 5 min but not 24 h after SEQA. As in the case of sequence order, prolonged initial training with SEQA induced resistance to interference by SEQB. We conclude that explicit sequence learning is more susceptible to anterograde interference and implicit sequence learning is more susceptible to retrograde interference. However, both become resistant to interference with saturation training. We propose that an essential feature of motor skill learning is the process by which discrete explicit task elements are combined with continuous implicit features of movement to form flawless sequential actions.
| S-EPMC2681421 | biostudies-other
Project description:Learning may occur with or without awareness, as explicit (intentional) or implicit (incidental) learning. The caudate nucleus and the putamen, which are affected early in Huntington's disease (HD), are thought to be essential for motor sequence learning. However, the results of existing studies are inconsistent concerning presence/absence of deficits in implicit and explicit motor sequence learning in HD. We assessed implicit and explicit motor sequence learning using sequences of equivalent structure in 15 individuals with a positive HD genetic test (7 premanifest; 8 early stage disease) and 11 matched controls. The HD group showed evidence of normal implicit motor sequence learning, whereas explicit motor sequence learning was impaired in manifest and premanifest HD gene carriers, with progressive decline with progressive disease. Explicit sequence learning may be a useful cognitive biomarker for HD progression.
| S-EPMC2997693 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesLearning as measured by eyeblink classical conditioning is preserved in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, but severely affected in patients with progressive supranuclear palsy. We here sought to clarify whether procedural learning is impaired in multiple system atrophy (MSA), and whether it may be helpful for the differentiation of parkinsonian syndromes.DesignWe investigated learning using (1) eyeblink classical conditioning with a delay (interstimulus interval 0 ms) and a trace (600 ms) paradigm and (2) a serial reaction time task.SettingParticipants were recruited from academic research centres.Participants11 patients with MSA and 11 healthy controls.ResultsImplicit learning in eyeblink classical conditioning (acquisition of conditioned responses) as well as the serial reaction time task measures of implicit learning (reaction time change) are impaired in patients with MSA as compared with controls, whereas explicit learning as measured by the sequence recall of the serial reaction time task is relatively preserved.AnalysisWe hypothesise that the learning deficits of patients with MSA are due to lesions of cerebellar and connected brainstem areas.ConclusionsA retrospective synopsis of these novel data on patients with MSA and groups of patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and progressive supranuclear palsy studied earlier suggest that eyeblink classical conditioning may contribute to the early differentiation of atypical Parkinson syndromes from idiopathic Parkinson's disease. This hypothesis should be tested in a prospective trial.
| S-EPMC3773641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA variety of options and techniques for causing implicit and explicit motor learning have been described in the literature. The aim of the current paper was to provide clearer guidance for practitioners on how to apply motor learning in practice by exploring experts' opinions and experiences, using the distinction between implicit and explicit motor learning as a conceptual departure point.MethodsA survey was designed to collect and aggregate informed opinions and experiences from 40 international respondents who had demonstrable expertise related to motor learning in practice and/or research. The survey was administered through an online survey tool and addressed potential options and learning strategies for applying implicit and explicit motor learning. Responses were analysed in terms of consensus (? 70%) and trends (? 50%). A summary figure was developed to illustrate a taxonomy of the different learning strategies and options indicated by the experts in the survey.ResultsAnswers of experts were widely distributed. No consensus was found regarding the application of implicit and explicit motor learning. Some trends were identified: Explicit motor learning can be promoted by using instructions and various types of feedback, but when promoting implicit motor learning, instructions and feedback should be restricted. Further, for implicit motor learning, an external focus of attention should be considered, as well as practicing the entire skill. Experts agreed on three factors that influence motor learning choices: the learner's abilities, the type of task, and the stage of motor learning (94.5%; n = 34/36). Most experts agreed with the summary figure (64.7%; n = 22/34).ConclusionThe results provide an overview of possible ways to cause implicit or explicit motor learning, signposting examples from practice and factors that influence day-to-day motor learning decisions.
| S-EPMC4546413 | biostudies-literature