scholarly journals Risking Everything in Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder: An Analogue Decision-Making Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Croft ◽  
Jessica R. Grisham ◽  
Andrew Perfors ◽  
Brett K. Hayes
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

scholarly journals Decision-making under uncertainty in obsessive–compulsive disorder

2015 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 166-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pushkarskaya ◽  
David Tolin ◽  
Lital Ruderman ◽  
Ariel Kirshenbaum ◽  
J. MacLaren Kelly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Decision Making Under Uncertainty ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

scholarly journals Effects of Anterior Capsulotomy on Decision Making in Patients with Refractory Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chencheng Zhang ◽  
Yilin Chen ◽  
Shuaiwei Tian ◽  
Tao Wang ◽  
Yile Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Anterior Capsulotomy

Inhibition of Habitual Decision-Making Circuitry in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

2021 ◽  
Vol 89 (9) ◽  
pp. S359
Author(s):  
Darsol Seok ◽  
Reza Tadayon-Nejad ◽  
Wan-wa Wong ◽  
Joseph O'Neill ◽  
Jamie Feusner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

scholarly journals Increased fronto-striatal reward prediction errors moderate decision making in obsessive–compulsive disorder

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 1246-1258 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. U. Hauser ◽  
R. Iannaccone ◽  
R. J. Dolan ◽  
J. Ball ◽  
J. Hättenschwiler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Late Onset ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Prediction Errors ◽  
Learning Mechanisms ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Reward Prediction ◽  
Reinforcement Learning Models

BackgroundObsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) has been linked to functional abnormalities in fronto-striatal networks as well as impairments in decision making and learning. Little is known about the neurocognitive mechanisms causing these decision-making and learning deficits in OCD, and how they relate to dysfunction in fronto-striatal networks.MethodWe investigated neural mechanisms of decision making in OCD patients, including early and late onset of disorder, in terms of reward prediction errors (RPEs) using functional magnetic resonance imaging. RPEs index a mismatch between expected and received outcomes, encoded by the dopaminergic system, and are known to drive learning and decision making in humans and animals. We used reinforcement learning models and RPE signals to infer the learning mechanisms and to compare behavioural parameters and neural RPE responses of the OCD patients with those of healthy matched controls.ResultsPatients with OCD showed significantly increased RPE responses in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the putamen compared with controls. OCD patients also had a significantly lower perseveration parameter than controls.ConclusionsEnhanced RPE signals in the ACC and putamen extend previous findings of fronto-striatal deficits in OCD. These abnormally strong RPEs suggest a hyper-responsive learning network in patients with OCD, which might explain their indecisiveness and intolerance of uncertainty.

scholarly journals Think twice: Impulsivity and decision making in obsessive–compulsive disorder

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 263-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giacomo Grassi ◽  
Stefano Pallanti ◽  
Lorenzo Righi ◽  
Martijn Figee ◽  
Mariska Mantione ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

scholarly journals Arbitration between Action Strategies in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Gruner ◽  
Alan Anticevic ◽  
Daeyeol Lee ◽  
Christopher Pittenger
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Behavioral Outcomes ◽  
Cognitive Remediation ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Model Based ◽  
Model Free ◽  
Action Strategies ◽  
Evaluative Processes

Decision making in a complex world, characterized both by predictable regularities and by frequent departures from the norm, requires dynamic switching between rapid habit-like, automatic processes and slower, more flexible evaluative processes. These strategies, formalized as “model-free” and “model-based” reinforcement learning algorithms, respectively, can lead to divergent behavioral outcomes, requiring a mechanism to arbitrate between them in a context-appropriate manner. Recent data suggest that individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) rely excessively on inflexible habit-like decision making during reinforcement-driven learning. We propose that inflexible reliance on habit in OCD may reflect a functional weakness in the mechanism for context-appropriate dynamic arbitration between model-free and model-based decision making. Support for this hypothesis derives from emerging functional imaging findings. A deficit in arbitration in OCD may help reconcile evidence for excessive reliance on habit in rewarded learning tasks with an older literature suggesting inappropriate recruitment of circuitry associated with model-based decision making in unreinforced procedural learning. The hypothesized deficit and corresponding circuitry may be a particularly fruitful target for interventions, including cognitive remediation.

scholarly journals The effect of task difficulty on decision-making

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 204380871878742
Author(s):  
Estrella Serrano-Guerrero ◽  
Juan Francisco Rodríguez-Testal ◽  
Agustín Martín-Rodríguez ◽  
Miguel Ruiz-Veguilla
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Significant Interaction ◽  
Task Difficulty ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Affective Psychosis ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Beads Task ◽  
And Task

The aim was to determine whether there are differences between groups in jumping to conclusions and the number of beads required to make a decision based on task difficulty. An assessment was made of 19 patients with non-affective psychosis, 19 with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), and 19 healthy controls. The Beads Task scale was used in its two versions. Patients with non-affective psychosis jumped to conclusions. There was significant interaction between group and task difficulty. Increased difficulty of the task did not affect the number of beads patients with non-affective psychosis or OCD needed to make their decision. However, healthy controls needed to see more beads before they could make a decision in the hard test than in the easy one. Patients with non-affective psychosis jump to conclusions, but neither this group nor the OCD patients benefit from the changes in task difficulty when making their decisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document