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视为主观代价高。个人将避免更高的 要求，就像他们避免体力劳动一样。主观夸大的成本削弱了 认知控制，破坏任务表现--这一效应已在精神分裂症中得到检验， 抑郁症，帕金森氏症，抑郁症。然而，尽管具有广泛的意义， 关于跟踪努力成本或调解参与或坚持要求的决定的机制 认知任务大量的证据表明，多巴胺信号，传达瞬间的 激励状态可以抵消努力成本，从而促进身体和认知努力。虽然 多巴胺已被证明可以增强认知控制，但矛盾的是，它似乎也破坏了 通过促进冲动行为来控制。 这个项目的目的是测试一个假设，可以调和多巴胺对 通过统一认知和物理领域的动作选择机制来实现认知控制。 也就是说，我将测试的假设，多巴胺偏见受益于成本信息在行动中 选择，但它优先用于“邻近”动作（那些立即被建议的动作）。 环境）。这一假设统一了领域，因为物理行为通常是由 环境（例如，手边的杠杆或脚下的楼梯），而控制动作则不是。相反，在 在认知领域，控制行为必须与环境所暗示的竞争，并且只会获胜。 当控制机制反应足够快时，该假设的一个重要推论是， 非常高的多巴胺水平可以放大即使是很小的接近差异，从而增强近端 “习惯”超过“控制”行为，并解释为什么多巴胺有时会破坏控制 而不是促进它。 我将通过形式化生物约束神经网络模型中的原理来测试这一假设， 并测试他们是否可以解释现有数据集的神经生理学和行为动力学。 在一系列的实验中，我将测量和操纵多巴胺（用PET成像， 药物干预）和测量和操纵接近度（用眼睛注视和任务设计）， 以确定是否接近度和多巴胺决定认知行为选择的假设。 最后，我用我的实验数据来检验神经网络模型是否能预测性能 使用一组共同的参数。这项工作的一个长期好处将是准确地阐明 多巴胺可以影响努力的认知行为，并产生目标的机制， 药物干预，促进理想的努力行动，也没有促进冲动。