Loss aversion in schizophrenia

Trémeau, Fabien; Brady, Melissa; Saccente, Erica; Moréno, Alexis; Epstein, Henry; Citrome, Leslie; Malaspina, Dolores; Javitt, Daniel C.

doi:10.1016/j.schres.2008.03.027

Cited by 41 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent withTom et al (2007),Tremeau et al (2008) found that individuals with schizophrenia were significantly less likely than non-patient controls to demonstrate loss aversion in a hypothetical buying and selling task. Schizophrenia has long been hypothesized to be associated with disruption of the mesolimbic and mesocortical dopamine systems that project to the areas that demonstrated neural loss aversion inTom et al (2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 56%

Losses, gains, and brains: Neuroeconomics can help to answer open questions about loss aversion

Rick

2010

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much is understood about loss aversion (the tendency for losses to have greater hedonic impact than comparable gains), but open questions remain. First, there is debate about whether loss aversion is best understood as the byproduct of a single system within the brain that treats losses and gains asymmetrically or the interaction of separate deliberative and emotional systems. Second, some have questioned whether loss aversion alone is the best account for the endowment effect. Alternative accounts, based on the differential focus induced by buying versus selling, the order in which buyers and sellers consider positive and negative aspects of the good, the extent to which ownership induces liking, and the desire to avoid making a bad deal, have been proposed. Third, it is unclear whether losses are actually experienced more intensely than comparable gains, or whether people simply behave as if they were. Some have argued that loss aversion is nothing more than an affective forecasting error, while others have argued that there are many situations in which losses are actually more impactful than comparable gains. This review synthesizes the insights that behavioral researchers and neuroeconomists have contributed to each debate, and highlights potential avenues for future research.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 56%

Losses, gains, and brains: Neuroeconomics can help to answer open questions about loss aversion

Rick

2010

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, these studies have shown that individual differences in susceptibility to irrational biases (such as disproportionate loss-aversion), correspond to individual differences in decision-related activity in areas such as medial PFC and amygdala. Although we know of no imaging studies of SZ patients, involving hypothetical decision-making situations, such as those described above, several recent behavioral studies (Brown et al, 2013; Heerey et al, 2008; Tremeau et al, 2008) have used such paradigms to investigate the ability to estimate expected value on-the-fly, as well as the influence of irrational biases on this ability, in schizophrenia. The fact that it is possible to make a distinction between the acquisition of incentive salience and the on-the-fly computation of EV begs the question of whether variables related to one type of decision are likely to be more closely tied to clinically-ratable motivational deficits than to the other.…”

Section: Identifying a Relationship Between Ev And Avolition: Consimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A limited set of findings (Brown et al, 2013; Heerey et al, 2008; Tremeau et al, 2008) points to an impaired ability in schizophrenia patients to estimate expected value on-the-fly, in hypothetical decision-making situations. However, while data support a connection between the instantaneous computation of expected value and intellectual function in schizophrenia (Brown et al, 2013; Heerey et al, 2008), we are not aware of data supporting a link between the instantaneous computation of expected value and motivational deficits in schizophrenia.…”

Section: Evidence For Faulty Ev Signaling In Szmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivational Deficits in Schizophrenia and the Representation of Expected Value

Waltz

Gold

2015

Behavioral Neuroscience of Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivational deficits (avolition and anhedonia) have historically been considered important negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Numerous studies have attempted to identify the neural substrates of avolition and anhedonia in schizophrenia, but these studies have not produced much agreement. Deficits in various aspects of reinforcement processing have been observed in individuals with schizophrenia, but it is not exactly clear which of these deficits actually engender motivational impairments in SZ. The purpose of this chapter is to examine how various reinforcement-related behavioral and neural signals could contribute to motivational impairments in both schizophrenia, and psychiatric illness, in general. In particular, we describe different aspects of the concept of expected value (EV), such as the distinction between the EV of stimuli and the expected value of actions, the acquisition of value vs. the estimation of value, and the discounting of value as a consequence of time or effort required. We conclude that avolition and anhedonia in SZ are most commonly tied to aberrant signals for expected value, in the context of learning. We discuss implications for further research on the neural substrates of motivational impairments in psychiatric illness.

show abstract

“…One process that is widely affected across mental illnesses is decision-making (Montague et al, 2012; Mukherjee and Kable, 2014). This observation is especially true of individuals with schizophrenia, who differ from healthy comparison subjects in several decision-making tasks (Ahn et al, 2011; Heerey et al, 2008; Heerey et al, 2011; Heerey et al, 2007; Tremeau et al, 2008; Waltz and Gold, 2007; Weller et al, 2014; Wolf et al, 2014). In particular, individuals with schizophrenia discount delayed rewards more than healthy subjects, placing greater relative value on immediate rewards (Ahn et al, 2011; Gold et al, 2013; Heerey et al, 2011; Heerey et al, 2007; Weller et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While these decision-making constructs have been tested in select studies with patients with schizophrenia (e.g. Reddy et al, 2014; Trémeau et al, 2008; Shurman et al, 2005), results are often mixed, and it is not clear how deficits could relate to each other. Testing multiple dimensions of decision-making allowed us to determine whether alterations in decision-making are widespread, or restricted to delay discounting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Steeper discounting of delayed rewards in schizophrenia but not first-degree relatives

Katchmar

et al. 2017

Psychiatry Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excessive discounting of future rewards has been related to a variety of risky behaviors and adverse clinical conditions. Prior work examining delay discounting in schizophrenia suggests an elevated discount rate. However, it remains uncertain whether this reflects the disease process itself or an underlying genetic vulnerability, whether it is selective for delay discounting or reflects pervasive changes in decision-making, and whether it is driven by specific clinical dimensions such as cognitive impairment. Here we investigated delay discounting, as well as loss aversion and risk aversion, in three groups: schizophrenia (SZ), unaffected first-degree family members (FM), and controls without a family history of psychosis (NC). SZ had elevated discounting, without changes in loss aversion or risk aversion. Contrary to expectations, the FM group did not show an intermediate phenotype in discounting. Higher discount rates correlated with lower cognitive performance on verbal reasoning, but this did not explain elevated discount rates in SZ. Group differences were driven primarily by the non-smoking majority of the sample. This study provides further evidence for elevated discounting in schizophrenia, and demonstrates that steeper discounting is not necessarily associated with familial risk, cannot be wholly accounted for by cognitive deficits, and is not attributable to smoking-related impulsivity.

show abstract

Loss aversion in schizophrenia

Cited by 41 publications

References 35 publications

Losses, gains, and brains: Neuroeconomics can help to answer open questions about loss aversion

Losses, gains, and brains: Neuroeconomics can help to answer open questions about loss aversion

Motivational Deficits in Schizophrenia and the Representation of Expected Value

Steeper discounting of delayed rewards in schizophrenia but not first-degree relatives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About