Back

A Transdiagnostic Dimensional Approach to Behavioral Dysregulation: Examining Reward and Punishment Sensitivity Across Psychopathology

Oka, T.; Sasaki, A.; Kobayashi, N.

2024-10-16 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2024.10.14.24315505 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimTheoretically, deficits in reward/punishment sensitivity are considered an essential component associated with behavioral dysregulation, which is characteristic of compulsive-impulsive disorders. However, recent studies have indicated that several disorders are linked to problems with reward/punishment sensitivity, and their results have been inconsistent. This lack of clinical specificity and robustness might reflect more general problems with traditionally diagnostic categories of psychiatry. To address these concerns, we investigated whether a transdiagnostic dimensional approach could more effectively examine clinical associations related to reward/punishment sensitivity for behavioral dysregulation. MethodsUsing multiple psychiatric symptom scores and reward/punishment sensitivity in online general-population samples (N = 19505), we applied factor analyses to extract transdiagnostic symptom dimensions. Then, we conducted a mixed-effect generalized linear model to examine the relationships between psychopathology and reward/punishment sensitivity. ResultsWe extracted three transdiagnostic dimensions, which were validated between two separate datasets: Compulsive hypersensitivity (CH), Social withdrawal (SW), and Addictive behavior (AB). While SW was associated with reward sensitivity negatively and punishment sensitivity positively, AB showed opposite associations. On the other hand, CH was positively associated with both sensitivities. ConclusionOur results highlight the importance of reward/punishment sensitivity for our understanding of behavioral dysregulation, especially in the compulsive-impulsive dimension. Moreover, these findings underscore how transdiagnostic perspectives contribute to a more powerful examination of reward/punishment deficits than studies focusing on a categorical disorder.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.