What you want may not be what you like: A test of the aberrant salience hypothesis in schizophrenia risk

Abstract

Motivational abnormalities represent a key area of dysfunction in individuals with, or at risk for, schizophrenia and severely limit broad domains of functioning in these populations. The aberrant salience hypothesis posits that motivational abnormalities are the result of an over-attribution of salience to nonpleasurable stimuli but an under-attribution of salience to pleasurable ones. Consequently, people "want" what they do not "like" but do not "want" what they "like." However, it is unclear how this hypothesis manifests in schizophrenia risk beyond monetary rewards. The current research provided a multimodal investigation of the aberrant salience hypothesis in people with elevated psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) who are at risk for developing psychosis. Study 1 examined the link between liking and incentive salience using a neurobiological indicator of incentive salience (contingent negative variation/CNV) in 23 PLEs and 21 Control participants. The PLEs group showed diminished CNV reactivity to pleasant (vs. neutral) social images, which was driven by an augmented response to neutral stimuli. Study 2 examined liking, incentive salience, and conscious wanting experience using a psychological indicator of incentive salience (positive spontaneous thoughts/PSTs) in 38 PLEs and 246 Control participants. The PLEs group showed diminished correspondence between liking, PSTs, and conscious wanting across diverse reward contexts. Collectively, individuals with PLEs overattribute salience to neutral stimuli and, to a lesser degree, under-attribute salience to rewards. Findings of the current research support abnormal salience attribution as a trait-like feature implicated in the pathophysiology and development of schizophrenia and provide valuable insights on research and treatment of this illness.

Shared and unique affective abnormalities in schizotypy dimensions

“…In the current study, and consistent with previous research (Kwapil et al, 2012; Li et al, 2019; Li et al, 2020; Martin et al, 2020), individuals met the criteria for the SocAnh group if they had an elevated score on the brief RSAS (>1.5 SD above the mean) but not on the brief PAS or MIS (<1.5 SD above the mean). Individuals met the criteria for the PerMag group if they had elevated scores on the brief PAS or MIS (>1.5 SD above the mean on either scale) but not on the brief RSAS (<1.5 SD above the mean).…”

Neural Circuitry of Salience and Reward Processing in Psychosis

“…The aberrant processing of these informative or relevant (i.e., salient) events, as seen in blunted prediction errors to rewards (see Prediction Error Signaling in Psychosis ) ( 45 , 46 ) or decreased responses to relevant visual stimuli ( 38 , 47 ), seem to relate to negative symptoms, such as anhedonia or lack of motivation ( 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 ). In contrast, aberrant processing of irrelevant (i.e., nonsalient) events, such as neutral events in reward learning or oddball paradigms, seems to provide an explanation for positive symptoms ( 33 , 34 ). We do note, however, some studies with contradictory symptom associations [e.g., ( 25 , 27 , 51 )].…”

“…Furthermore, overweighting nonpredictive cues was correlated with more severe positive symptom scores in schizophrenia ( 33 ). A recent study ( 34 ) exploring neutral stimuli in a reward learning setting showed that individuals with psychotic-like experiences overattribute salience to neutral stimuli and underattribute salience to rewards, indicating that abnormal salience attribution is a trait-like feature. Together, these studies show that neutral or irrelevant stimuli are consistently overweighted in patients at different disease stages, with the exception of patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, showing a clear indication of aberrant salience, although associations with symptoms are inconsistent.…”

Social affective forecasting and social anhedonia in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a daily diary study

“…Each item is answered True (1) or False (0), and a total RSAS score is calculated as the sum of all individual items (possible range=0-15). The RSAS exhibits adequate psychometric properties 64,94,95 and is widely used in the SA 63 , SSD 53 , and psychosis risk literature 96,97 . In our sample, omega was 0.91.…”