henhaobio
Sign in

Journal of NeuroscienceNeurosciencePeer-reviewed journal article

Dopamine and temporal discounting: revisiting pharmacology and individual differences

Elke Stefanie SmithiD, Hendrik TheisiD, Thilo van EimereniD, Kilian KnauthiD, Deniz TuzsusiD, Lei ZhangiD, David MathariD, Jan PetersiD

PDFDOIPreprintData

Abstract

Disorders characterised by changes in dopamine (DA) neurotransmission are often linked to changes in the temporal discounting of future rewards. Likewise, pharmacological manipulations of DA neuro-transmission in healthy individuals modulate temporal discounting, but there is considerable variability in the directionality of reported pharmacological effects, as enhancements and reductions of DA signalling have been linked to both increases and reductions of temporal discounting. This may be due to meaningful individual differences in drug effects and/or false positive findings in small samples. To resolve these inconsistencies, we 1) revisited pharmacological effects of the DA precursor L-DOPA on temporal discounting in a large sample of N = 76 healthy participants (n = 44 male) and 2) examined several putative proxy measures for DA to revisit the role of individual differences in a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled pre-registered study (https://osf.io/a4k9j/). Replicating previous findings, higher rewards were discounted less (magnitude effect). Computational modelling using hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation confirmed that the data in both drug conditions were best accounted for by a non-linear temporal discounting drift diffusion model. In line with recent animal and human work, L-DOPA reliably reduced the discount rate with a small effect size, challenging earlier findings in substantially smaller samples. We found no credible evidence for linear or quadratic effects of putative DA proxy measures on model parameters, calling into question the role of these measures in accounting for individual differences in DA drug effects.

Citations
6
FWCI
2.34
Field percentile
top 11%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISWagner '20Castrellon '20Castrellon '18Smith '26Lempert '26Soutschek '23
80% semantic matchNeuroscience
Ben Wagner, Mareike Clos, Tobias Sommer+1 more·Journal of Neuroscience·Sep 18, 2020· 47 citations