Mind matters: Placebo enhances reward learning in Parkinson’s disease

By Bosiljka Tasic, V. Menon, T. Nguyen, Tae Kyung Kim, T. Jarsky, Zizhen Yao, Boaz P. Levi, Lucas T Gray, S. Sorensen, Tim Dolbeare and 12 more. Nature Neuroscience, 2014

1,005 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Expectations have a powerful influence on how we experience the world. Neurobiological and computational models of learning suggest that dopamine is crucial for shaping expectations of reward and that expectations alone may influence dopamine levels. However, because expectations and reinforcers are typically manipulated together, the role of expectations per se has remained unclear. We separated these two factors using a placebo dopaminergic manipulation in individuals with Parkinson's disease. We combined a reward learning task with functional magnetic resonance imaging to test how expectations of dopamine release modulate learning-related activity in the brain. We found that the mere expectation of dopamine release enhanced reward learning and modulated learning-related signals in the striatum and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. These effects were selective to learning from reward: neither medication nor placebo had an effect on learning to avoid monetary loss. These findings suggest a neurobiological mechanism by which expectations shape learning and affect.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Neurology, Physiology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/60de12a0e1e82c016ac38b139ad2154b2afd79ca

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Neurology

In Physiology

Citations in the corpus

Statistical analysis of spatial expression patterns for spatially resolved transcriptomic studies (2019, background): “Four of them are cell identity markers: FoxO1 and Slc17a8 for glutamatergic neurons; igtp for GABAergic neurons; and opalin for Oligodendrocytes 49 .”
Molecular Diversity and Specializations among the Cells of the Adult Mouse Brain (2018, background): “Inference of Cell Types and States Using Independent Components Analysis The recognition of subtle variation among cells of the same class presents a formidable analytical challenge for unsupervised analysis (Mayer et al., 2015; Satija et al., 2015; Shekhar et al., 2016; Tanay and Regev, 2017; Tasic”
Molecular, Spatial and Functional Single-Cell Profiling of the Hypothalamic Preoptic Region (2018, background): “in distinct anatomical structures of the preoptic region, in a manner similar to the spatial segregation of different types of excitatory neurons in various layers of the cortex (36).”
Molecular Architecture of the Mouse Nervous System (2018, methodology): “Recently, single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) has emerged as a powerful method for unbiased discovery of cell types and states (Islam et al., 2011, 2013; Jaitin et al., 2014; Macosko et al., 2015; Shekhar et al., 2016; Tang et al., 2009; Tasic et al., 2016; Usoskin et al., 2014; Zeisel et al., 201”
SingleCellNet: a computational tool to classify single cell RNA-Seq data across platforms and across species (2018, background): “, 2017) and a cross-study classification comparison of neuronal atlases (Fig S6 and Fig S7) (Tasic et al., 2016; Zeisel et al., 2018), and a workflow of SCN (Fig S8).”
A large-scale circuit mechanism for hierarchical dynamical processing in the primate cortex (2015, background): “There are no systematicmeasurements of the timescales of areas in response to different stimuli, but recent studies have compared temporal responses and integration timescales across areas and report a hierarchical organization (Hasson et al., 2008; Ogawa and Komatsu, 2010; Lerner et al., 2011; Bern”