↓ Skip to main content

Reward Learning, Neurocognition, Social Cognition, and Symptomatology in Psychosis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reward Learning, Neurocognition, Social Cognition, and Symptomatology in Psychosis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00100
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn E. Lewandowski, Alexis E. Whitton, Diego A. Pizzagalli, Lesley A. Norris, Dost Ongur, Mei-Hua Hall

Abstract

Patients with psychosis spectrum disorders exhibit deficits in social and neurocognition, as well as hallmark abnormalities in motivation and reward processing. Aspects of reward processing may overlap behaviorally and neurobiologically with some elements of cognitive functioning, and abnormalities in these processes may share partially overlapping etiologies in patients. However, whether reward processing and cognition are associated across the psychoses and linked to state and trait clinical symptomatology is unclear. The present study examined associations between cognitive functioning, reward learning, and clinical symptomatology in a cross-diagnostic sample. Patients with schizophrenia (SZ; n = 37), bipolar I disorder with psychosis (BD; n = 42), and healthy controls (n = 29) were assessed for clinical symptoms (patients only), neurocognitive functioning using the MATRICS Battery (MCCB) and reward learning using the probabilistic reward task (PRT). Groups were compared on neurocognition and PRT response bias, and associations between PRT response bias and neurocognition or clinical symptoms were examined controlling for demographic variables and PRT task difficulty (discriminability). Patients with SZ performed worse than controls on most measures of neurocognition; patients with BD exhibited deficits in some domains between the level of patients with SZ and controls. The SZ - but not BD - group exhibited deficits in social cognition compared to controls. Patients and controls did not differ on PRT response bias, but did differ on PRT discriminability. Better response bias across the sample was associated with poorer social cognition, but not neurocognition; conversely, discriminability was associated with neurocognition but not social cognition. Symptoms of psychosis, particularly negative symptoms, were associated with poorer response bias across patient groups. Reward learning was associated with symptoms of psychosis - in particular negative symptoms - across diagnoses, and was predictive of worse social cognition. Reward learning was not associated with neurocognitive performance, suggesting that, across patient groups, social cognition but not neurocognition may share common pathways with this aspect of reinforcement learning. Better understanding of how cognitive dysfunction and reward processing deficits relate to one another, to other key symptom dimensions (e.g., psychosis), and to diagnostic categories, may help clarify shared etiological pathways and guide efforts toward targeted treatment approaches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 20%
Student > Master 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 25 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 15%
Neuroscience 18 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 <1%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 38 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,463,662
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#6,887
of 10,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,285
of 352,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#50
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.