No abstract

No abstract

Motivations shape our behaviour: the promise of reward invigorates, while in the face of punishment, we hold back. Abnormalities of motivational processing are implicated in clinical disorders characterised by excessive habits and loss of top-down control, notably substance and behavioural addictions. Striatal and frontal dopamine have been hypothesised to play complementary roles in the respective generation and control of these motivational biases. However, while dopaminergic interventions have indeed been found to modulate motivational biases, these previous pharmacological studies used regionally non-selective pharmacological agents. Here, we tested the hypothesis that frontal dopamine controls the balance between Pavlovian, bias-driven automated responding and instrumentally learned action values. Specifically, we examined whether selective enhancement of cortical dopamine either (i) enables adaptive suppression of Pavlovian control when biases are maladaptive; or (ii) non-specifically modulates the degree of bias-driven automated responding. Healthy individuals (n=35) received the catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor tolcapone in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over design, and completed a motivational Go NoGo task known to elicit motivational biases. In support of hypothesis (ii), tolcapone globally decreased motivational bias. Specifically, tolcapone improved performance on trials where the bias was unhelpful, but impaired performance in bias-congruent conditions. These results indicate a non-selective role for cortical dopamine in the regulation of motivational processes underpinning top-down control over automated behaviour. The findings have direct relevance to understanding neurobiological mechanisms underpinning addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorders, as well as highlighting a potential trans-diagnostic novel mechanism to address such symptoms.

Theories on the aetiology of depression in humans are intimately linked to animal research on stressor controllability effects. However, explicit translations of established animal designs are lacking. In two consecutive studies, we developed a translational paradigm to study stressor controllability effects in humans. In the first study, we compared three groups of participants, one exposed to escapable stress, one yoked inescapable stress group, and a control group not exposed to stress. Although group differences indicated successful stress induction, the manipulation failed to differentiate groups according to controllability. In the second study, we employed an improved paradigm and contrasted only an escapable stress group to a yoked inescapable stress group. The final design successfully induced differential effects on self-reported perceived control, exhaustion, helplessness, and behavioural indices of adaptation to stress. The latter were examined in a new escape behaviour test which was modelled after the classic shuttle box animal paradigm. Contrary to the learned helplessness literature, exposure to uncontrollable stress led to more activity and exploration; however, these behaviours were ultimately not adaptive. We discuss the results and possible applications in light of the findings on learning and agency beliefs, inter-individual differences, and interventions aimed at improving resilience to stress-induced mental dysfunction.