ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2026
Reinforcement learning deficits in at-risk mental state for psychosis: the role of primary negative symptoms.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Negative symptoms such as amotivation begin to emerge in the at-risk mental state for psychosis (ARMS), and in some cases, these symptoms are idiopathic (i.e., primary negative symptoms, PNS). While deficits in reinforcement learning (RL) are evident in patients with first-episode and chronic schizophrenia and are associated with the severity of negative symptoms, whether these deficits are present during ARMS warrants further investigation. Additionally, it is unclear whether these deficits, especially those driven by rewards, are particularly characteristic of ARMS individuals with PNS. This study compared 97 ARMS individuals and 37 healthy controls (HC) on probabilistic RL. We then compared ARMS individuals with PNS (n = 15), those without PNS (n = 82), and HC on probabilistic RL. Reward- and punishment-driven RL (both trial-by-trial and procedural) and value-guided choice were assessed using two probabilistic RL tasks: Go/NoGo (GNG) and Gain vs. Loss-Avoidance (GLA) tasks. Compared with HC, ARMS individuals showed impairments in overall procedural RL on both RL tasks, as well as subtle, task-specific alterations in value-guided choice. Furthermore, ARMS-PNS individuals, relative to HC, showed particular deficits in reward-driven RL (trial-to-trial RL on GLA task and procedural RL on both tasks), as well as impaired positive expected value representations to guide decision-making on GLA task. Extending the results in patients with established psychosis, our findings indicate that deficits in RL exist before the onset of a psychotic disorder. With a modest sample of ARMS-PNS individuals, preliminary evidence suggests that deficits in reward-driven RL may be more specific to PNS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42888291What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.