Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40439740›Full record

Trial reportPsychopharmacology2025

Bidirectional modulation of reward-guided decision making by dopamine.

Ana Antonia Dias Maile, Theo O J Gruendler, Adrian G Fischer, Hannah Kurtenbach, Luca F Kaiser, Monja I Froböse, Gerhard Jocham

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

7 authors.

Ana Antonia Dias MaileBiological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. ana.dias.maile@uni-duesseldorf.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-9965-8081
Theo O J GruendlerCenter of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Otto Von Guericke University Magdeburg, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5631-7352
Adrian G FischerCenter of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Otto Von Guericke University Magdeburg, Universitätsplatz 2, 39106, Magdeburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8779-9051
Hannah KurtenbachBiological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9317-5840
Luca F KaiserBiological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9078-6080
Monja I FroböseBiological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5657-8798
Gerhard JochamBiological Psychology of Decision Making, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3591-8797

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe neuromodulator dopamine is known to play a key role in reward-guided decision making, where choice options are often characterized by multiple attributes. Different decision strategies can be used to merge these choice attributes with personal preferences (e.g., risk preferences) and integrate them into a single subjective value. While the influence of dopamine on risk preferences has been investigated, it is unknown whether dopamine is also involved in arbitrating between decision strategies.

objectiveIn the present study, we investigate the effects of pharmacological dopamine manipulations on arbitrating between different decision strategies in a healthy sample.

methods31 healthy male participants performed a reward-guided decision-making task under the influence of the dopamine D

resultsNotably, we observed that the dopaminergic interventions shifted the (overall) weighting of option attributes without changing how option attributes are integrated into a subjective value (decision strategy). These effects were bidirectional: Amisulpride reduced whereas L-DOPA increased the degree to which choices were influenced by both reward magnitude and reward probability. These effects occurred in the absence of changes in statistically optimal behavior.

conclusionTogether, our data provide evidence for a role of dopamine in controlling the influence of value parameters on choice irrespective of decision strategies.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDopamineRewardAdultAmisulprideBayes TheoremChoice BehaviorDopamine AgentsDopamine AntagonistsDopamine D2 Receptor AntagonistsDouble-Blind MethodHumansLevodopaMaleSulpirideYoung AdultAmisulprideDopamineDopamine AgentsDopamine AntagonistsDopamine D2 Receptor AntagonistsLevodopaSulpirideAmisulprideComputational modelingDecision makingDecision strategyDopamineL-DOPAPharmacologyReward-guided decision makingRisky decision making

Identifiers

PMID40439740
PMCPMC12578710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.