OPRL1 genotypes moderate the association between prosocial effort‐based decision making and apathy in at‐risk older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apathy is a common neuropsychiatric symptom in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) characterized by reduced goal-directed activity and motivation. Older adults tend to value prosocial over self-serving behaviors, with this shift being preserved in early AD. It is unknown whether prosocial rewards are more effective at motivating effort and how prosocial orientations relate to apathy in at-risk older adults. OPRL1 encodes the nociceptin/orphanin FQ receptor, which downregulates dopaminergic activity in the ventral tegmental area, a region critical for reward processing. Building on evidence that prosocial behaviors are inherently rewarding for older adults, we hypothesized that older adults would exert more effort for prosocial than self-serving rewards and that OPRL1 genetic variations would modulate the relationship between prosocial orientations and apathy. METHOD: = 68.48, 38 females) from the PREVENT-AD cohort completed a novel computerized paradigm where they decided whether to exert effort (button presses) for prosocial (charity donations) and self-serving (monetary) rewards. Reward-effort discounting curves were modeled with linear, sigmoid, and Weibull functions, and random-effects Bayesian model comparison identified the best fitting model. Effort willingness ("yes" responses) and amount of reward needed to initiate effort (bias) were compared between conditions, and difference scores quantified participants' prosocial orientations. Regression models examined associations between difference and Apathy Motivation Index scores. Genotypes of OPRL1 rs6010718 and rs6010719 SNPs were included as moderators. RESULT: Sigmoid functions best fit reward-effort discounting curves (Figure 1). Participants made more 'yes' responses and showed lower bias for prosocial compared to self-serving rewards (Figure 2). For rs6010718, minor T allele carriers showed lower apathy associated with reduced bias for prosocial relative to self-serving rewards, whereas CC individuals showed no effect (Figure 3). For rs6010719, minor G allele carriers showed higher apathy associated with reduced bias for prosocial relative to self-serving rewards, while AA individuals showed no effect (Figure 3). CONCLUSION: Older adults at risk for AD demonstrate a higher willingness and require smaller rewards to exert effort for prosocial compared to self-serving rewards. Genetic variations in OPRL1 SNPs modulate the relationship between prosocial orientations and apathy, suggesting individuals with specific genetic profiles show reduced apathetic behavior associated with prosocial effort in aging.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".