Why do we repeat choices that we know are bad for us? Decision making is characterized by the parallel engagement of two distinct systems, goal-directed and habitual, thought to arise from two computational learning mechanisms, model-based and model-free. The habitual system is a candidate source of pathological fixedness. Using a decision task that measures the contribution to learning of either mechanism, we show a bias towards model-free (habit) acquisition in disorders involving both natural (binge eating) and artificial (methamphetamine) rewards, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. This favoring of model-free learning may underlie the repetitive behaviors that ultimately dominate in these disorders. Further, we show that the habit formation bias is associated with lower gray matter volumes in caudate and medial orbitofrontal cortex. Our findings suggest that the dysfunction in a common neurocomputational mechanism may underlie diverse disorders involving compulsion.

BackgroundCognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) but access to CBT is limited. Internet-based CBT (ICBT) with therapist support is potentially a more accessible treatment. There are no randomized controlled trials testing ICBT for OCD. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of ICBT for OCD in a randomized controlled trial.MethodParticipants (n=101) diagnosed with OCD were randomized to either 10 weeks of ICBT or to an attention control condition, consisting of online supportive therapy. The primary outcome measure was the Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) administered by blinded assessors.ResultsBoth treatments lead to significant improvements in OCD symptoms, but ICBT resulted in larger improvements than the control condition on the YBOCS, with a significant between-group effect size (Cohen's d) of 1.12 (95% CI 0.69–1.53) at post-treatment. The proportion of participants showing clinically significant improvement was 60% (95% CI 46–72) in the ICBT group compared to 6% (95% CI 1–17) in the control condition. The results were sustained at follow-up.ConclusionsICBT is an efficacious treatment for OCD that could substantially increase access to CBT for OCD patients. Replication studies are warranted.

ObjeCtivesTo evaluate the efficacy of therapist guided internet based cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) programme for body dysmorphic disorder (BDD-NET) compared with online supportive therapy.

IMPORTANCE It is unclear whether D-cycloserine (DCS), a partial N-methyl-D-aspartate agonist that enhances fear extinction, can augment the effects of exposure-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). OBJECTIVES To examine whether DCS augments the effects of CBT for OCD and to explore (post hoc) whether concomitant antidepressant medication moderates the effects of DCS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A 12-week, double-blind randomized clinical trial with 3-month follow-up conducted at an academic medical center between September 4, 2012, and September 26, 2013. Participants included 128 adult outpatients with a primary diagnosis of OCD and a Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) score of 16 or higher. Concurrent antidepressant medication was permitted if the dose had been stable for at least 2 months prior to enrollment and remained unchanged during the trial. The main analysis was by intention-to-treat population. INTERVENTIONS All participants received a previously validated Internet-based CBT protocol over 12 weeks and were randomized to receive either 50 mg of DCS or placebo, administered 1 hour before each of 5 exposure and response prevention tasks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Clinician-administered Y-BOCS score at week 12 and at 3-month follow-up. Remission was defined as a score of 12 or lower on the Y-BOCS. RESULTS In the primary intention-to-treat analyses, DCS did not augment the effects of CBT compared with placebo (mean [SD] clinician-rated Y-BOCS score, DCS: 13.86 [6.50] at week 12 and 12.35 [7.75] at 3-month follow-up; placebo: 11.77 [5.95] at week 12 and 12.37 [6.68] at 3-month follow-up) but showed a significant interaction with antidepressants (clinician-rated Y-BOCS, B = −1.08; Z = −2.79; P = .005). Post hoc analyses revealed that antidepressants significantly impaired treatment response in the DCS group but not the placebo group, at both posttreatment and follow-up (clinician-rated Y-BOCS: t 62 = −3.00; P = .004; and t 61 = −3.49; P < .001, respectively). In the DCS group, a significantly greater proportion of antidepressant-free patients achieved remission status at follow-up (60% [95% CI, 45%-74%]) than antidepressant-medicated patients (24% [95% CI, 9%-48%]) (P = .008). Antidepressants had no effect in the placebo group (50% [95% CI, 36%-64%] remission rate in both groups). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings suggest that antidepressants may interact with DCS to block its facilitating effect on fear extinction. Use of DCS may be a promising CBT augmentation strategy but only in antidepressant-free patients with OCD.

Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.•Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research.•You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact librarypure@kcl.ac.uk providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. to -0.19). Improvement in BDD was maintained after 2-4 months follow-up (3 studies; delta=-0.89, 95% CI =-1.24 to -0.54). Meta-regression analyses did not reveal any significant predictors of outcome. CBT is an efficacious treatment for BDD but there is substantial room for improvement. The specificity and long-term effects of CBT for BDD require further evaluation using credible control conditions. Additional trials comparing CBT with pharmacological therapies, as well as their combination, are warranted. Tele-care options, such as Internet-based CBT, hold great promise to increase access to evidence-based treatment for a majority of patients who need it, and should be evaluated further. A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Our decisions are based on parallel and competing systems of goal-directed and habitual learning, systems which can be impaired in pathological behaviours. Here we focus on the influence of motivation and compare reward and loss outcomes in subjects with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) on model-based goal-directed and model-free habitual behaviours using the two-step task. We further investigate the relationship with acquisition learning using a one-step probabilistic learning task. Forty-eight OCD subjects and 96 healthy volunteers were tested on a reward and 30 OCD subjects and 53 healthy volunteers on the loss version of the two-step task. Thirty-six OCD subjects and 72 healthy volunteers were also tested on a one-step reversal task. OCD subjects compared with healthy volunteers were less goal oriented (model-based) and more habitual (model-free) to reward outcomes with a shift towards greater model-based and lower habitual choices to loss outcomes. OCD subjects also had enhanced acquisition learning to loss outcomes on the one-step task, which correlated with goal-directed learning in the two-step task. OCD subjects had greater stay behaviours or perseveration in the one-step task irrespective of outcome. Compulsion severity was correlated with habitual learning in the reward condition. Obsession severity was correlated with greater switching after loss outcomes. In healthy volunteers, we further show that greater reward magnitudes are associated with a shift towards greater goal-directed learning further emphasizing the role of outcome salience. Our results highlight an important influence of motivation on learning processes in OCD and suggest that distinct clinical strategies based on valence may be warranted.

The results suggest that ICBT has sustained long-term effects and that adding an Internet-based booster program can further improve long-term outcome and prevent relapse for some OCD patients.

No abstract