A shared threat-anticipation circuit is dynamically engaged at different moments by certain and uncertain threat.

Temporal dynamics play a central role in models of emotion: "fear" is widely conceptualized as a phasic response to certain-and-imminent danger, whereas "anxiety" is a sustained response to uncertain-or-distal harm. Yet the underlying human neurobiology remains contentious. Leveraging an ethnoracially diverse sample, translationally relevant paradigm, and theory-driven modeling approach, we demonstrate that certain and uncertain threat recruit a shared threat-anticipation circuit. This circuit exhibits persistently elevated activation when anticipating uncertain threat encounters and a transient burst of activation in the moments before certain encounters. For many scientists and clinicians, feelings are the defining feature of human fear and anxiety. Here we used an independently validated brain signature to covertly decode the momentary dynamics of anticipatory distress for the first time. Results mirrored the dynamics of neural activation. These observations provide fresh insights into the neurobiology of threat-elicited emotions and set the stage for more ambitious clinical and mechanistic research.

Social effort discounting reveals domain-general and social-specific motivation components.

BACKGROUND: Social motivation is crucial for healthy interpersonal connections and is impaired in a subset of the general population and across many psychiatric disorders. However, compared to nonsocial (e.g., monetary) motivation, social motivation has been understudied in quantitative behavioral work, especially regarding willingness to exert social effort. We developed a novel social effort discounting task, paired with a monetary task to examine motivational specificity. We expected social task performance would relate to general motivation also show selective relationships with self-reported avoidance tendencies and with sociality. METHODS: An analyzed sample of 397 participants performed the social and nonsocial effort discounting task online, along with self-report measures of various aspects of motivation and psychiatric symptomatology. RESULTS: Social and nonsocial task motivation correlated strongly (rho=0.71 p<0.001). Both social and nonsocial task motivation related similarly to self-reported general motivation (social ß=0.16; nonsocial ß=0.13) and to self-reported approach motivation (social ß=0.14; nonsocial ß=0.11), with this common effect captured by a significant main effect across social and nonsocial conditions. Significant condition interaction effects supported a selective relationship of social task motivation with self-reported sociality and also with avoidance motivation. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel social effort discounting task revealed both domain-general and social-specific components of motivation. In combination with other measures, this approach can facilitate further investigation of common and dissociable neurobehavioral mechanisms, in order to better characterize normative and pathological variation and develop personalized interventions targeting specific contributors to social impairment.

Evaluation of a new intrinsic and extrinsic motivation scale in youth with psychosis spectrum symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Impairment in intrinsic motivation (IM), the drive to satisfy internal desires like mastery, may play a key role in disability in psychosis. However, we have limited knowledge regarding relative impairments in IM compared to extrinsic motivation (EM) or general motivation (GM), in part due to limitations in existing measures. METHODS: Here we address this gap using a novel Trait Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation self-report scale in a sample of n = 243 participants including those with schizophrenia, psychosis-risk, and healthy controls. Each of the 7 IM and 6 EM items used a 7-point Likert scale assessing endorsement of dispositional statements. Bifactor analyses of these items yielded distinct IM, EM, and GM factor scores. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined in relation to General Causality Orientation Scale (GCOS-CP) and Quality of Life 3-item IM measure (QLS-IM). Utility was assessed in relation to psychosis-spectrum (PS) status and CAINS clinical amotivation. RESULTS: IM and EM showed acceptable inter-item consistency (IM: α = 0.88; EM: α = 0.66); the bifactor model exhibited fit that varied from good to borderline to inadequate depending on the specific fit metric (SRMR = 0.038, CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.106 ± 0.014). IM scores correlated with established IM measures: GCOS-CP Autonomy (rho = 0.38, p < 0.01) and QLS-IM (rho = 0.29, p < 0.01). Supporting discriminant validity, IM did not correlate with GCOS-CP Control (rho = -0.14, p > 0.05). Two-year stability in an available longitudinal subset (n = 35) was strong (IM: rho = 0.64, p < 0.01; EM: rho = 0.55, p < 0.01). Trait IM was lower in PS youth (t = 4.24, p < 0.01), and correlated with clinical amotivation (rho = -0.36, p < 0.01); EM did not show significant clinical associations. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the clinical relevance of IM in psychosis risk. They also provide preliminary support for the reliability, validity and utility of this new Trait IM-EM scale, which addresses a measurement gap and can facilitate identification of neurobehavioral and clinical correlates of IM deficits.