Is Decreased Prefrontal Cortical Sensitivity to Monetary Reward Associated With Impaired Motivation and Self-Control in Cocaine Addiction?

Abstract

Objective-To examine the brain's sensitivity to monetary rewards of different magnitudes in cocaine abusers and to study its association with motivation and self-control.Method-Sixteen cocaine abusers and 13 matched healthy comparison subjects performed a forcedchoice task under three monetary value conditions while brain activation was measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Objective measures of state motivation were assessed by reaction time and accuracy, and subjective measures were assessed by self-reports of task engagement. Measures of trait motivation and self-control were assessed with the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire.Results-The cocaine abusers demonstrated an overall reduced regional brain responsivity to differences between the monetary value conditions. Also, in comparison subjects but not in cocaine abusers reward-induced improvements in performance were associated with self-reports of task engagement, and money-induced activations in the lateral prefrontal cortex were associated with activations in the orbitofrontal cortex. For cocaine subjects, prefrontal cortex sensitivity to money was instead associated with motivation and self-control.Conclusions-These findings suggest that in cocaine addiction (1) activation of the corticolimbic reward circuit to gradations of money is altered; (2) lack of a correlation between objective and subjective measures of state motivation may be indicative of disrupted perception of motivational drive, which could contribute to impairments in self-control; and (3) the lateral prefrontal cortex modulates trait motivation and deficits in self-control, and a possible underlying mechanism may encompass a breakdown in prefrontal-orbitofrontal cortical communication.

Football Gambling Three Arm-Controlled Study: Gamblers, Amateurs and Laypersons

“…Another region of involvement is the anterior insula. These findings were similar to those of Goldstein et al [16] in substance addiction which demonstrated the involvement of the ventral striatum, the rostral anterior cingulate cortex and the insula in reward processing and decision making. Potenza et al [17] compared pathological gamblers and a control group performing a Stroop task.…”

Acute naltrexone does not remediate fronto‐striatal disturbances in alcoholic and alcoholic polysubstance‐dependent populations during a monetary incentive delay task

“…The current findings may, therefore, suggest that in long-term alcohol and polysubstance abstinence, there are sustained disturbances within a network of regions that function to integrate the cognitive interpretation of motivational drives (Goldstein et al, 2007) and other emotional and interoceptive states.…”

The Neuropsychology of Cocaine Addiction: Recent Cocaine Use Masks Impairment

“…It is also a better verbal IQ estimate in lower SES and minority populations (Strauss et al 2006). Tasks measuring attention/executive function were the (1) Controlled Oral Word Association Task (Benton, 1968) assessing flexibility of verbal thought processes and the ability to update working memory (number of correct words produced for phonemic (2 categoriesFletters 'F' and 'S') and semantic categories (2 categoriesF'animals' and 'fruits and vegetables'), 1 min per category); sensitivity and specificity for both indices are reliable in discriminating controls from those with impaired frontal function (sensitivity of 88 and 100% has been reported for phonemic and semantic categories, respectively) (Lezak, 1995); (2) digit span (standardized scores based on the sum of raw scores for both forward and backward tests) and letter-number sequencing subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III; Wechsler, 1997) assessing attentional capacity and verbal working memory; both subtests have adequate sensitivity and specificity (Lezak, 1995); (3) Symbol Digit Modalities Test (Smith, 1982) assessing attentional capacity (written; number of correct responses in 90 s; possessing ample sensitivity (approximately 80%) in detecting brain injury and learning disorders) (Lezak, 1995); (4) Trail Making Test (Reitan, 1955) assessing visual motor tracking, cognitive flexibility, and planning (trails A and B are very sensitive to cognitive decline and differentiate controls from both mild and severe head trauma patients; sensitivity of 77 and 79% has been reported for trails A and B, respectively) (O'Donnell et al, 1984;Lezak, 1995); (5) Mazes subtest from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children III (Wechsler, 1987) assessing planning and sustained attention (this subtest is a 'satisfactory substitute for longer adult tests such as the Porteus mazes' in assessing executive functioning for most clinical purposes; (we used scaled scores based on norms for the highest (16 years) age) (Lezak, 1995); (6) Wisconsin Card Sort Test 3 (Berg, 1948) computerized version (Heaton, 1999) assessing set shifting and planning (specificity for the Wisconsin Card Sort Test is reported to be low, however it is very sensitive to the effects of frontal damage); and the (7) Color-Word Stroop Task (Golden, 1978), an index of directed attention and cognitive flexibility (the Color-Word Stroop is sensitive to both mild and severe frontal lobe impairment, differentiating those with learning disabilities or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity disorder from controls (eg, sensitivity, 89%)) (Homack and Riccio, 2004;Lezak, 1995). Two newly developed tasks of executive function were also included in this NP battery, and although more studies are needed to test their validity, recent reports have provided evidence for their utility in disting...…”