Neural valuation of rewards and punishments in posttraumatic stress disorder: a computational approach

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Outcomes: A Longitudinal Study of Risk and Ambiguity in Monetary and Medical Decision-Making

How do decision-makers choose between alternatives offering outcomes that are not easily quantifiable? Previous literature on decisions under uncertainty focused on alternatives with quantifiable outcomes, for example monetary lotteries. In such scenarios, decision-makers make decisions based on success chance, outcome magnitude, and individual preferences for uncertainty. It is not clear, however, how individuals construct subjective values when outcomes are not directly quantifiable. To explore how decision-makers choose when facing non-quantifiable outcomes, we focus here on medical decisions with qualitative outcomes. Specifically, we ask whether decision-makers exhibit the same attitudes towards two types of uncertainty - risk and ambiguity - across domains with quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To answer this question, we designed an online decision-making task where participants made binary choices between alternatives offering either guaranteed lower outcomes or potentially higher outcomes that are associated with some risk and ambiguity. The outcomes of choices were either different magnitudes of monetary gains or levels of improvement in a medical condition. We recruited 429 online participants and repeated the survey in two waves, which allowed us to compare the between-domain attitude consistency with within-domain consistency, over time. We found that risk and ambiguity attitudes were moderately correlated across domains. Over time, risk attitudes had slightly higher correlations compared to across domains, while in ambiguity over-time correlations were slightly weaker. These findings are consistent with the conceptualization of risk attitude as more trait-like, and ambiguity attitudes as more state-like. We discuss the implications and applicability of our novel modeling approach to broader contexts with non-quantifiable outcomes.

Latent-state and model-based learning in PTSD

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is characterized by altered emotional and behavioral responding following a traumatic event. In this article, we review the concepts of latent-state and model-based learning (i.e., learning and inferring abstract task representations) and discuss their relevance for clinical and neuroscience models of PTSD. Recent data demonstrate evidence for brain and behavioral biases in these learning processes in PTSD. These new data potentially recast excessive fear towards trauma cues as a problem in learning and updating abstract task representations, as opposed to traditional conceptualizations focused on stimulus-specific learning. Biases in latent-state and model-based learning may also be a common mechanism targeted in common therapies for PTSD. We highlight key knowledge gaps that need to be addressed to further elaborate how latent-state learning and its associated neurocircuitry mechanisms function in PTSD and how to optimize treatments to target these processes.