Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41424918›Full record

ArticleComputational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

Improving the Reliability of the Pavlovian Go/No-Go Task for Computational Psychiatry Research.

Samuel Zorowitz, Gili Karni, Natalie Paredes, Nathaniel Daw, Yael Niv

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.), 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. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Samuel Zorowitz *Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, USA.
Gili Karni *Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, USA.
Natalie ParedesDepartment of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4037-0205
Nathaniel DawPrinceton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, USA.
Yael NivPrinceton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Pavlovian go/no-go task is commonly used to measure individual differences in Pavlovian biases and their interaction with instrumental learning. The task has also been widely used in computational psychiatry research, to correlate Pavlovian biases with mental health symptoms. However, prior research has reported unacceptable reliability for computational model-based performance measures for this task, limiting its usefulness in individual-differences research. Here, we apply several strategies previously shown to enhance task-measure reliability (e.g., task gamification, hierarchical Bayesian modeling for model estimation) to the Pavlovian go/no-go task, to improve the reliability of the task as a tool for future research. Methods: In two experiments, two independent samples of adult participants (N = 103, N = 110) completed a novel, gamified version of the Pavlovian go/no-go task multiple times over several weeks. We used hierarchical Bayesian modeling to derive reinforcement learning model-based indices of participants' task performance, and to estimate the reliability of these measures. Results: In Experiment 1, we observed considerable practice effects, with most participants reaching near-ceiling levels of performance with repeat testing. Consequently, the test-retest reliability of some model parameters was unacceptable (as low as 0.379). In Experiment 2, participants completed a modified version of the task designed to lessen these practice effects. We observed greatly reduced practice effects and improved estimates of the test-retest reliability (range: 0.696-0.989). Conclusion: The results demonstrate that model-based measures of performance on our modified Pavlovian go/no-go task can reach levels of reliability sufficient for use in individual-differences research. We therefore provide the task code for use by the computational psychiatry community (as well as other researchers). Additional investigation is necessary to validate the modified version of the task in other populations and settings.

Indexed as

Pavlovian biasPavlovian go/no-go taskreinforcement learningreliability

Identifiers

PMID41424918
PMCPMC12716264

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.