Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25158242›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of psychiatry2015

Feedback-driven trial-by-trial learning in autism spectrum disorders.

Marjorie Solomon, Michael J Frank, J Daniel Ragland, Anne C Smith, Tara A Niendam, Tyler A Lesh, David S Grayson, Jonathan S Beck, John C Matter, Cameron S Carter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marjorie SolomonFrom the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis, Sacramento Calif.; the University of California, Davis, MIND Institute, Sacramento, Calif.; the University of California, Davis, Imaging Research Center, Sacramento, Calif.; the Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, R.I.; the University of Arizona; and the University of California, Davis, Center for Neuroscience, Sacramento, Calif.
Michael J Frank
J Daniel Ragland
Anne C Smith
Tara A Niendam
Tyler A Lesh
David S Grayson
Jonathan S Beck
John C Matter
Cameron S Carter

Funding

Cognitive Control in AutismK08MH074967 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI SOLOMON, MARJORIE · 2007 to 2011
$735k
The Neural Substrates of Higher-Level Learning in AutismR21MH099250 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI SOLOMON, MARJORIE · 2012 to 2013
$414k
NIMH NIH HHS 1 K08 MH-074967NIMH NIH HHS K08 MH074967NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH099250
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveImpairments in learning are central to autism spectrum disorders. The authors investigated the cognitive and neural basis of these deficits in young adults with autism spectrum disorders using a well-characterized probabilistic reinforcement learning paradigm.

methodThe probabilistic selection task was implemented among matched participants with autism spectrum disorders (N=22) and with typical development (N=25), aged 18-40 years, using rapid event-related functional MRI. Participants were trained to choose the correct stimulus in high-probability (AB), medium-probability (CD), and low-probability (EF) pairs, presented with valid feedback 80%, 70%, and 60% of the time, respectively. Whole-brain voxel-wise and parametric modulator analyses examined early and late learning during the stimulus and feedback epochs of the task.

resultsThe groups exhibited comparable performance on medium- and low-probability pairs. Typically developing persons showed higher accuracy on the high-probability pair, better win-stay performance (selection of the previously rewarded stimulus on the next trial of that type), and more robust recruitment of the anterior and medial prefrontal cortex during the stimulus epoch, suggesting development of an intact reward-based working memory for recent stimulus values. Throughout the feedback epoch, individuals with autism spectrum disorders exhibited greater recruitment of the anterior cingulate and orbito-frontal cortices compared with individuals with typical development, indicating continuing trial-by-trial activity related to feedback processing.

conclusionsIndividuals with autism spectrum disorders exhibit learning deficits reflecting impaired ability to develop an effective reward-based working memory to guide stimulus selection. Instead, they continue to rely on trial-by-trial feedback processing to support learning dependent upon engagement of the anterior cingulate and orbito-frontal cortices.

Indexed as

Child Development Disorders, PervasiveLearning DisabilitiesAdultDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersFeedback, PsychologicalFemaleGyrus CinguliHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMemory, Short-TermModels, StatisticalNeuropsychological TestsPrefrontal CortexReinforcement, PsychologyResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID25158242
PMCPMC5538105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.