Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41890826›Full record

ArticleResearch square2026

Effort and Substance Use: Differentiating Tobacco Use Through Reinforcement Learning of Effort Based Decision Making.

Kasey P Spry, Jazmyne James, Alison H Oliveto, Michael Mancino, Kenneth T Kishida, Merideth A Addicott

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in Research square, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kasey P SpryDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Jazmyne JamesDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Alison H OlivetoDepartment of Psychiatry , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Michael MancinoDepartment of Psychiatry , University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Kenneth T KishidaDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Merideth A AddicottDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.

Funding

Improving Treatment Outcomes for Prescription Opioid DependenceR01DA039088 · NIDA · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI MANCINO, MICHAEL J, OLIVETO, ALISON · 2015 to 2019
$2.9M
The Neurobiology of Drug AbuseT32DA041349 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SARA RAULERSON JONES · 2017 to 2026
$1.8M
Neuroscience Training at Wake ForestT32NS115704 · NINDS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CZOTY, PAUL W. · 2021 to 2025
$1.4M
Acute and Chronic Nicotine Modulation of Reinforcement LearningK01DA033347 · NIDA · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI ADDICOTT, MERIDETH A. · 2013 to 2017
$734k
Evaluation of effort-based decision making in tobacco use disorder, tobacco and opioid use disorder, and tobacco use cessationF31DA063320 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Kasey Potts Spry · 2025 to 2026
$106k
NIDA NIH HHS F31 DA063320NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA033347NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA039088NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA041349NINDS NIH HHS T32 NS115704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffort-based decision making evaluates rewards relative to the effort required to obtain it, an important process of healthy goal-directed motivation and behavior. Computational models provide mechanistic insights underlying choice behavior and potential alterations in neuropsychiatric disorders, including substance use disorders. We applied computational models to effort-based choice behavior to characterize underlying decision processes and if these mechanisms differ by substance use status.

methodsParticipants completed the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task, choosing between low- and high-effort options for monetary rewards varying in magnitude and probability. Participants met criteria for no tobacco use (n = 23), current tobacco use disorder (n = 26), former tobacco use disorder (n = 22), and tobacco and opioid use disorder (n = 29). Computational models from two families, Subjective Value and Reinforcement Learning, were fit and compared. Parameters from the best-fitting model underwent principal components analysis and linear discriminant analysis.

resultsTemporal difference reinforcement learning model demonstrated greater model evidence and predictive accuracy, indicating better fit to effort-based choice behavior. Principal components analysis revealed meaningful multivariate distinctions: PC1 differentiated all groups except individuals without tobacco use versus individuals with tobacco use disorder; PC3 distinguished tobacco and opioid use disorder from all other groups. Linear discriminant analysis demonstrated group separation with 76% classification accuracy.

conclusionsA reinforcement learning framework better explained participants' effort-based choice behavior. Substance use status relates to dynamic behavioral changes (i.e. learning) as measured by the multivariate combination of learning rate, future discounting, and choice temperature.

Indexed as

decision makingEffortOpioidsReinforcement learningsmokingTobacco

Identifiers

PMID41890826
PMCPMC13015586

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.