Elevated decision uncertainty and reduced avoidance drives in depression, anxiety and substance use disorders during approach–avoidance conflict: a replication study

Abstract

Background: Decision-making under approach–avoidance conflict (AAC; e.g., sacrificing quality of life to avoid feared outcomes) may be affected in multiple psychiatric disorders. Recently, we used a computational (active inference) model to characterize information processing differences during AAC in individuals with depression, anxiety and/or substance use disorders. Individuals with psychiatric disorders exhibited increased decision uncertainty (DU) and reduced sensitivity to unpleasant stimuli. This preregistered study aimed to determine the replicability of this processing dysfunction. Methods: A new sample of participants completed the AAC task. Individual-level computational parameter estimates, reflecting decision uncertainty and sensitivity to unpleasant stimuli (“emotion conflict”; EC), were obtained and compared between groups. Subsequent analyses combining the prior and current samples allowed assessment of narrower disorder categories. Results: The sample in the present study included 480 participants: 97 healthy controls, 175 individuals with substance use disorders and 208 individuals with depression and/or anxiety disorders. Individuals with substance use disorders showed higher DU and lower EC values than healthy controls. The EC values were lower in females, but not males, with depression and/or anxiety disorders than in healthy controls. However, the previously observed difference in DU between participants with depression and/or anxiety disorders and healthy controls did not replicate. Analyses of specific disorders in the combined samples indicated that effects were common across different substance use disorders and affective disorders. Limitations: There were differences, although with small effect size, in age and baseline intellectual functioning between the previous and current sample, which may have affected replication of DU differences in participants with depression and/or anxiety disorders. Conclusion: The now robust evidence base for these clinical group differences motivates specific questions that should be addressed in future research: can DU and EC become behavioural treatment targets, and can we identify neural substrates of DU and EC that could be used to measure severity of dysfunction or as neuromodulatory treatment targets?.