Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41059633›Full record

ArticlePsychological medicine2025

A computational approach to understanding effort-based decision-making in depression.

Vincent Valton, Anahit Mkrtchian, Madeleine Moses-Payne, Alan Gray, Karel Kieslich, Samantha VanUrk, Veronika Samborska, Don Chamith Halahakoon, Sanjay G Manohar, Peter Dayan and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Computational phenotyping of effort-based decision-making in type-2 diabetes on and off semaglutide.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. The cognitive and motor determinants of the perception of effort.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Vincent ValtonInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2508-6731
Anahit MkrtchianDivision of Psychiatry and Max Planck Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9876-2852
Madeleine Moses-PayneDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7837-1096
Alan GrayInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.
Karel KieslichInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2403-4833
Samantha VanUrkInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.
Veronika SamborskaInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6889-159X
Don Chamith HalahakoonInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.
Sanjay G ManoharNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences and Department of Experimental Psychology, https://ror.org/052gg0110Oxford University, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0735-4349
Peter DayanMax Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, https://ror.org/03a1kwz48University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3476-1839
Masud HusainNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences and Department of Experimental Psychology, https://ror.org/052gg0110Oxford University, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6850-9255
Jonathan P RoiserInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, https://ror.org/02jx3x895University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8269-1228

Funding

Alexander von Humboldt-StiftungMax-Planck-GesellschaftNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 101798/Z/13/ZWellcome Trust 226645/Z/22/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMotivational dysfunction is a core feature of depression and can have debilitating effects on everyday function. However, it is unclear which cognitive processes underlie impaired motivation and whether impairments persist following remission. Decision-making concerning exerting effort to obtain rewards offers a promising framework for understanding motivation, especially when examined with computational tools.

methodsEffort-based decision-making was assessed using the Apple Gathering Task, where participants decide whether to exert effort via a grip-force device to obtain varying levels of reward; effort levels were individually calibrated and varied parametrically. We present a comprehensive computational analysis of decision-making, initially validating our model in healthy volunteers (

resultsFour fundamental computational mechanisms that drive patterns of effort-based decisions, which replicated across samples, were identified: overall bias to accept effort challenges; reward sensitivity; and linear and quadratic effort sensitivity. Traditional model-agnostic analyses showed that both depressed groups showed lower willingness to exert effort. In contrast with previous findings, computational analysis revealed that this difference was primarily driven by lower effort-acceptance bias, but not altered effort or reward sensitivity.

conclusionsThis work provides insight into the computational mechanisms underlying motivational dysfunction in depression. Lower willingness to exert effort could represent a trait-like factor contributing to symptoms and a fruitful target for treatment and prevention.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDepressionMotivationRewardAdultCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adultanhedoniacomputational psychiatrydepressioneffort-based decision-makingmotivation

Identifiers

PMID41059633
PMCPMC12527505

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.