Impulse Control Disorders in Parkinson's Disease Are Associated with Dysfunction in Stimulus Valuation But Not Action Valuation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A substantial subset of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients suffers from impulse control disorders (ICDs), which are side effects of dopaminergic medication. Dopamine plays a key role in reinforcement learning processes. One class of reinforcement learning models, known as the actor-critic model, suggests that two components are involved in these reinforcement learning processes: a critic, which estimates values of stimuli and calculates prediction errors, and an actor, which estimates values of potential actions. To understand the information processing mechanism underlying impulsive behavior, we investigated stimulus and action value learning from reward and punishment in four groups of participants: on-medication PD patients with ICD, on-medication PD patients without ICD, off-medication PD patients without ICD, and healthy controls. Analysis of responses suggested that participants used an actor-critic learning strategy and computed prediction errors based on stimulus values rather than action values. Quantitative model fits also revealed that an actor-critic model of the basal ganglia with different learning rates for positive and negative prediction errors best matched the choice data. Moreover, whereas ICDs were associated with model parameters related to stimulus valuation (critic), PD was associated with parameters related to action valuation (actor). Specifically, PD patients with ICD exhibited lower learning from negative prediction errors in the critic, resulting in an underestimation of adverse consequences associated with stimuli. These findings offer a specific neurocomputational account of the nature of compulsive behaviors induced by dopaminergic drugs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".