Elevated cognitive control over reward processing in recovered female patients with anorexia nervosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with anorexia nervosa are thought to exert excessive self-control to inhibit primary drives. METHODS: This study used functional MRI (fMRI) to interrogate interactions between the neural correlates of cognitive control and motivational processes in the brain reward system during the anticipation of monetary reward and reward-related feedback. In order to avoid confounding effects of undernutrition, we studied female participants recovered from anorexia nervosa and closely matched healthy female controls. The fMRI analysis (including node-to-node functional connectivity) followed a region of interest approach based on models of the brain reward system and cognitive control regions implicated in anorexia nervosa: the ventral striatum, medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). RESULTS: We included 30 recovered patients and 30 controls in our study. There were no behavioural differences and no differences in hemodynamic responses of the ventral striatum and the mOFC in the 2 phases of the task. However, relative to controls, recovered patients showed elevated DLPFC activity during the anticipation phase, failed to deactivate this region during the feedback phase and displayed greater functional coupling between the DLPFC and mOFC. Recovered patients also had stronger associations than controls between anticipation-related DLPFC responses and instrumental responding. LIMITATIONS: The results we obtained using monetary stimuli might not generalize to other forms of reward. CONCLUSION: Unaltered neural responses in ventral limbic reward networks but increased recruitment of and connectivity with lateral-frontal brain circuitry in recovered patients suggests an elevated degree of selfregulatory processes in response to rewarding stimuli. An imbalance between brain systems subserving bottom-up and top-down processes may be a trait marker of the disorder.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".