Dopamine and a Bias for Proximal Action in Cognitive Effort

多巴胺和认知努力中近端动作的偏差

• 批准号: 9755233
• 负责人: John Andrew Westbrook
• 金额: $ 6.16万
• 依托单位: BROWN UNIVERSITY
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 2018
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2018-09-01 至 2021-07-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/9755233
• 关键词: Affect; Behavioral; Biological; Cognitive; Computer Simulation; Conflict (Psychology); Corpus striatum structure; Cost Control; Data; Data Set; Decision Making; Diffusion; Dimensions; Disease; Distant; Dopamine; Drug Regulations; Environment; Eye; Habits; Hand; Impulsive Behavior; Impulsivity; Incentives; Individual; Intervention; Joints; Link; Measures; Mediating; Mental Depression; Modeling; Motivation; Motor; Neural Network Simulation; Neurons; Neurotransmitters; Parkinson Disease; Participant; Patients; Performance; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Pharmacological Treatment; Pharmacology; Pharmacology Study; Physical Efforts; Positioning Attribute; Positron-Emission Tomography; Process; Reaction Time; Reading; Research; Rewards; Schizophrenia; Series; Signal Transduction; Speed; Task Performances; Testing; Text Messaging; Theoretical model; Time; Up-Regulation; Work; adjudicate; base; behavior prediction; candidate selection; cognitive control; cognitive enhancement; cognitive neuroscience; cognitive task; cost; design; experimental study; gaze; imaging study; improved; indexing; network models; neural network; neurophysiology; novel; preference; psychologic; response

Project Summary Tasks with cognitive control demands are treated as subjectively costly. Individuals will avoid higher demands, just like they avoid physical effort. Subjectively exaggerated costs sap motivation for cognitive control, undermining task performance – an effect that has been examined in schizophrenia, depression, Parkinson’s disease, and depression. Yet, despite widespread significance, little is known about mechanisms tracking effort costs or mediating decisions to engage or persist with demanding cognitive tasks. Numerous lines of evidence suggest that dopamine signaling, conveying momentary incentive state, can offset effort costs and thus promote physical and cognitive effort. However, while dopamine has been shown to enhance cognitive control, it also appears to, paradoxically, undermine control by promoting impulsive action. The purpose of this project is to test a hypothesis that can reconcile conflicting effects of dopamine on cognitive control by unifying action selection mechanisms in the cognitive and physical domain. Namely, I will test the hypothesis that dopamine biases benefit over cost information during action selection, but it does so preferentially for “proximal” actions (those that are immediately suggested by the environment). This hypothesis unifies domains in that physical actions are typically suggested by the environment (e.g. levers at hand, or stairs underfoot), while control actions are not. Instead, in the cognitive domain, control actions must compete with what the environment suggests, and will only win out when control mechanisms respond quickly enough. An important corollary of the hypothesis is that very high dopamine levels can amplify even small differences in proximity, thus potentiating proximal “habits” over “controlled” actions and explaining why dopamine can sometimes undermine control rather than promote it. I will test this hypothesis by formalizing the principles in biologically-constrained neural network models, and testing whether they can explain neurophysiological and behavioral dynamics in existing data sets. In a series of experiments, I will measure and manipulate dopamine (with PET imaging and pharmacological interventions) and measure and manipulate proximity (with eye gaze and task design), to determine whether proximity and dopamine determine cognitive action selection as hypothesized. Finally, I test whether the neural network models can predict performance in my experimental data using a common set of parameters. A long-term benefit of this work will be to precisely articulate the mechanisms by which dopamine can affect effortful cognitive action, and generate targets for pharmacological interventions that promote desirable effortful action without also promoting impulsivity.

项目摘要 具有认知控制需求的任务被认为是主观上去的。个人会避免更高 要求，就像他们避免身体上的努力一样。主观上夸张的成本SAP动机 认知控制，破坏任务绩效 - 在精神分裂症中已检查的效果， 抑郁症，帕金森氏病和抑郁症。然而，任务宽度的意义，鲜为人知 关于跟踪努力成本的机制或调解决策以参与或坚持要求 认知任务。大量证据表明，多巴胺信号传导，传达了短暂的 激励状态，可以抵消努力成本，从而促进身体和认知努力。但是， 多巴胺已被证明可以增强认知控制，这似乎也矛盾地破坏了 通过促进冲动行动来控制。 该项目的目的是检验一个假设，该假设可以调解多巴胺对 认知控制通过在认知和物理领域中统一作用选择机制。 即，我将检验以下假设：多巴胺在行动过程中造成比成本信息的好处 选择，但对于“近端”动作而言，它确实优先（那些立即建议的动作 环境）。这个假设统一的域，因为身体行动通常由 环境（例如，手头的杠杆或脚下的楼梯），而控制动作则没有。相反，在 认知领域，控制动作必须与环境所建议的竞争，只会赢 何时控制机制足够快地响应。该假设的重要推论是 非常高的多巴胺水平甚至可以扩大近端的微小差异，从而增强了近端 对“受控”行动的“习惯”，并解释了为什么多巴胺有时会破坏控制 而不是推广它。 我将通过格式化生物约束的神经网络模型中的原理来检验这一假设， 并测试他们是否可以解释现有数据集中的神经生理和行为动态。 在一系列实验中，我将测量和操纵多巴胺（使用PET成像和 药理学干预措施）以及测量和操纵接近度（具有眼目光和任务设计）， 确定近端和多巴胺是否确定了假设的认知作用选择。 最后，我测试神经网络模型是否可以预测实验数据中的性能 使用一组常见的参数。这项工作的长期好处将是精确表达 多巴胺可以影响有效的认知作用并产生目标的机制 在不促进冲动的情况下促进理想的努力行动的药理干预措施。