Challenging the negative learning bias hypothesis of depression: reversal learning in a naturalistic psychiatric sample.

BACKGROUND: Classic theories posit that depression is driven by a negative learning bias. Most studies supporting this proposition used small and selected samples, excluding patients with comorbidities. However, comorbidity between psychiatric disorders occurs in up to 70% of the population. Therefore, the generalizability of the negative bias hypothesis to a naturalistic psychiatric sample as well as the specificity of the bias to depression, remain unclear. In the present study, we tested the negative learning bias hypothesis in a large naturalistic sample of psychiatric patients, including depression, anxiety, addiction, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and/or autism. First, we assessed whether the negative bias hypothesis of depression generalized to a heterogeneous (and hence more naturalistic) depression sample compared with controls. Second, we assessed whether negative bias extends to other psychiatric disorders. Third, we adopted a dimensional approach, by using symptom severity as a way to assess associations across the sample. METHODS: We administered a probabilistic reversal learning task to 217 patients and 81 healthy controls. According to the negative bias hypothesis, participants with depression should exhibit enhanced learning and flexibility based on punishment v. reward. We combined analyses of traditional measures with more sensitive computational modeling. RESULTS: In contrast to previous findings, this sample of depressed patients with psychiatric comorbidities did not show a negative learning bias. CONCLUSIONS: These results speak against the generalizability of the negative learning bias hypothesis to depressed patients with comorbidities. This study highlights the importance of investigating unselected samples of psychiatric patients, which represent the vast majority of the psychiatric population.

Effect of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) on reinforcement learning in humans.

BACKGROUND: The non-selective serotonin 2A (5-HT2A) receptor agonist lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) holds promise as a treatment for some psychiatric disorders. Psychedelic drugs such as LSD have been suggested to have therapeutic actions through their effects on learning. The behavioural effects of LSD in humans, however, remain incompletely understood. Here we examined how LSD affects probabilistic reversal learning (PRL) in healthy humans. METHODS: Healthy volunteers received intravenous LSD (75 µg in 10 mL saline) or placebo (10 mL saline) in a within-subjects design and completed a PRL task. Participants had to learn through trial and error which of three stimuli was rewarded most of the time, and these contingencies switched in a reversal phase. Computational models of reinforcement learning (RL) were fitted to the behavioural data to assess how LSD affected the updating ('learning rates') and deployment of value representations ('reinforcement sensitivity') during choice, as well as 'stimulus stickiness' (choice repetition irrespective of reinforcement history). RESULTS: Raw data measures assessing sensitivity to immediate feedback ('win-stay' and 'lose-shift' probabilities) were unaffected, whereas LSD increased the impact of the strength of initial learning on perseveration. Computational modelling revealed that the most pronounced effect of LSD was the enhancement of the reward learning rate. The punishment learning rate was also elevated. Stimulus stickiness was decreased by LSD, reflecting heightened exploration. Reinforcement sensitivity differed by phase. CONCLUSIONS: Increased RL rates suggest LSD induced a state of heightened plasticity. These results indicate a potential mechanism through which revision of maladaptive associations could occur in the clinical application of LSD.

Effects of methylphenidate on reinforcement learning depend on working memory capacity.

RATIONALE: Brain catecholamines have long been implicated in reinforcement learning, exemplified by catecholamine drug and genetic effects on probabilistic reversal learning. However, the mechanisms underlying such effects are unclear. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Here we investigated effects of an acute catecholamine challenge with methylphenidate (20 mg, oral) on a novel probabilistic reversal learning paradigm in a within-subject, double-blind randomised design. The paradigm was designed to disentangle effects on punishment avoidance from effects on reward perseveration. Given the known large individual variability in methylphenidate's effects, we stratified our effects by working memory capacity and trait impulsivity, putatively modulating the effects of methylphenidate, in a large sample (n = 102) of healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Contrary to our prediction, methylphenidate did not alter performance in the reversal phase of the task. Our key finding is that methylphenidate altered learning of choice-outcome contingencies in a manner that depended on individual variability in working memory span. Specifically, methylphenidate improved performance by adaptively reducing the effective learning rate in participants with higher working memory capacity. CONCLUSIONS: This finding emphasises the important role of working memory in reinforcement learning, as reported in influential recent computational modelling and behavioural work, and highlights the dependence of this interplay on catecholaminergic function.