Baker, Travis

Holroyd, Clay

English

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Articles - Behavioral/Cognitive:Impaired Neural Response to Negative Prediction Errors in Cocaine AddictionMuhammad A. Parvaz, Anna B. Konova, Greg H. Proudfit, Jonathan P. Dunning, Pias Malaker, Scott J. Moeller,Tom Maloney, Nelly Alia-Klein, and Rita Z. GoldsteinThe Journal of Neuroscience, 4 February 2015, 35(5):1872-1879; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2777-14.2015Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF)Impaired RPE signaling in substance dependence: comment on Parvaz et al.Travis Baker, Canadian Institute of Health Research Post-doctoral Fellow Clay B. Holroyd, PhD. Professor ofPsychology and Canada Research Chair Department of Psychology University of VictoriaSaint-Justine Children's Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QuebecThe recent article by Parvaz et al. utilized a component of the event -related brain potential (ERP) called thefeedback error-related negativity (FN) to investigate the neural mechanisms of substance dependence. As statedtherein, their central hypothesis was to "leverage feedback error related negativity (FN) to index reward predictionerror signals (RPE) in addiction", which they claimed had yet to be done: "Previous studies in addiction haveinvestigated FN as a marker of sensitivity to reward expectation ... or of outcome evaluation ... but importantlynever as a marker of RPE". Yet in a series of studies, first published in 2011 in Addiction Biology entitled"Individual differences in substance dependence: at the intersection of brain, behaviour and cognition" (Baker etal., 2011; see also Baker et al., 2008, 2013; Baker, 2012), we did exactly this -- with results that both anticipatedand conflict with Parvaz et al.'s main findings.The FN is an ERP component that is sensitive to the valence of positive vs. negative outcomes in guessing andlearning tasks. A prominent theory of this component suggests that it reflects a reward-prediction error signal(RPE), being relatively negative to unpredicted bad outcomes and relatively positive to unpredicted goodoutcomes (Holroyd and Coles, 2002). Parvaz et al analyzed the FN in a control group and in two groups ofsubjects with cocaine use disorder, categorized according to whether they tested positive [CUD+] or negative[CUD-] for cocaine on the study day. Among other observations, they found that only the control sample but not theCUD samples produced a larger negativity to unpredicted vs predicted losses and concluded that the RPE signalsare disrupted in CUD. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, for the following reasons. First,Parvaz et al. did not statistically compare the data across groups, leaving open the possibility that FN amplitudedid not in fact differ between the control participants and the individuals with CUD. Second, the findings werebased on the participants' subjectively reported estimates of reward probability, rather than on the objective rewardprobabilities (as is common practice) - perhaps because in their study the latter appear to elicit normal FNs acrossconditions and groups. And third, Parvaz et al found a larger negativity in their FNs to predicted vs unpredictedwins in their control sample, a finding that conflicts with the majority of previous FN studies (see Sambrook &Goslin, 2015, for a recent meta-analysis).By contrast, we previously found that young adults meeting criteria for substance dependence, as compared tocontrol subjects, exhibited an attenuated FN: The negative-going deflection in the ERP following reward trialsmirrored the negative going deflection in the ERP following no- reward trials, consistent with a disrupted positiveRPE signal in this population (Baker et al. 2011; Baker et al. 2013). Parvaz and colleagues' failure to replicate thisfinding likely results from measuring the FN with a mean amplitude method (200-350 ms), which confounds themeasure with other ERP components such as the P300 (Holroyd & Krigolson, 2007). By contrast, the"difference-wave" method that we utilized, which has been recommended in the recent meta-analysis of FNstudies (Sambrook & Goslin, 2015), isolates the FN by taking the difference between the ERPs to positive andnegative feedback. Visual inspection of Figure 2 in Parvaz et al. suggests that application of the difference waveapproach would have yielded findings consistent with our own.Baker TE, Stockwell T, Barnes G, Holroyd CB. (2011). Individual differences in substance dependence: at theintersection of brain, behaviour and cognition. Addict Biol 16: 458-466.Baker TE, Stockwell T, Barnes G, Holroyd CB. (2008). Neural and cognitive mechanisms of addiction. InternationReplies to Impaired Neural Response to Negative Prediction Errors in Co... http://www.jneurosci.org/content/35/5/1872.short/reply#jneuro_el_1122841 of 2 26/06/2015 9:58 AMSubmit responseJournal of Psychology (Vol. 43, No. 3-4, pp. 263-263). UK: PSYC PRESS.Baker TE. (2012): Genetics, Drugs, and Cognitive Control: Uncovering Individual Differences in SubstanceDependence. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. University of Victoria, Canada.Baker TE, Stockwell T, Barnes G, Haesevoets R, Holroyd CB. (2013): Top-Down vs. Bottoms-Up? Intermediatephenotypes for cognitive control and personality mediate the expression of dopamine genes in addiction. InJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience. Abstract, p 143. USA: MIT PRESSHolroyd CB, Coles MG. (2002). The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine,and the error-related negativity. Psychol Rev 109: 679-709.Holroyd CB, Krigolson OE. (2007). Reward prediction error signals associated with a modified time estimationtask. Psychophysiology, 44: 913 -917.Sambrook TD, Goslin J. (2015). A neural reward prediction error revealed by a meta-analysis of ERPs using greatgrand averages. Psychol Bull 141: 213-235.Conflict of Interest None declaredConflict of Interest:None declared... lessPublished June 25, 2015Replies to Impaired Neural Response to Negative Prediction Errors in Co... http://www.jneurosci.org/content/35/5/1872.short/reply#jneuro_el_1122842 of 2 26/06/2015 9:58 AM

Impaired RPE signaling in substance dependence : comment on Parvaz et al

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8650262/file/8650356.pdf

Impaired RPE signaling in substance dependence: comment on Parvaz et al

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Ghent University Academic Bibliography