Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30297411›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2018

Dopaminergic basis for signaling belief updates, but not surprise, and the link to paranoia.

Matthew M Nour, Tarik Dahoun, Philipp Schwartenbeck, Rick A Adams, Thomas H B FitzGerald, Christopher Coello, Matthew B Wall, Raymond J Dolan, Oliver D Howes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  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

9 authors.

Matthew M NourInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, United Kingdom; matthew.nour@kcl.ac.uk oliver.howes@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0858-6184
Tarik DahounMRC London Institute of Medical Sciences, Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0NN, United Kingdom.
Philipp SchwartenbeckMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London WC1B 5EH, United Kingdom.
Rick A AdamsInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London WC1N 3AZ, United Kingdom.
Thomas H B FitzGeraldMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London WC1B 5EH, United Kingdom.
Christopher CoelloImanova Centre for Imaging Sciences (Invicro Ltd), Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0NN, United Kingdom.
Matthew B WallImanova Centre for Imaging Sciences (Invicro Ltd), Hammersmith Hospital, London W12 0NN, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0493-6274
Raymond J DolanMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London WC1B 5EH, United Kingdom.
Oliver D HowesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, United Kingdom; matthew.nour@kcl.ac.uk oliver.howes@kcl.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC-A656-5QD30Medical Research Council MC_U120097115Wellcome Trust 094849/Z/10/ZWellcome Trust 098362/Z/12/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distinguishing between meaningful and meaningless sensory information is fundamental to forming accurate representations of the world. Dopamine is thought to play a central role in processing the meaningful information content of observations, which motivates an agent to update their beliefs about the environment. However, direct evidence for dopamine's role in human belief updating is lacking. We addressed this question in healthy volunteers who performed a model-based fMRI task designed to separate the neural processing of meaningful and meaningless sensory information. We modeled participant behavior using a normative Bayesian observer model and used the magnitude of the model-derived belief update following an observation to quantify its meaningful information content. We also acquired PET imaging measures of dopamine function in the same subjects. We show that the magnitude of belief updates about task structure (meaningful information), but not pure sensory surprise (meaningless information), are encoded in midbrain and ventral striatum activity. Using PET we show that the neural encoding of meaningful information is negatively related to dopamine-2/3 receptor availability in the midbrain and dexamphetamine-induced dopamine release capacity in the striatum. Trial-by-trial analysis of task performance indicated that subclinical paranoid ideation is negatively related to behavioral sensitivity to observations carrying meaningful information about the task structure. The findings provide direct evidence implicating dopamine in model-based belief updating in humans and have implications for understating the pathophysiology of psychotic disorders where dopamine function is disrupted.

Indexed as

AdultBayes TheoremBrainBrain MappingCultureDopamineFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMotivationParanoid DisordersPsychotic DisordersReceptors, DopamineDopamineReceptors, Dopamineaberrant salienceBayesian surpriseinformation-theoretic surpriseKullback–Leibler divergenceschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID30297411
PMCPMC6205436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.