Effects of dopamine on reinforcement learning and consolidation in Parkinson’s disease

  1. John P Grogan  Is a corresponding author
  2. Demitra Tsivos
  3. Laura Smith
  4. Brogan E Knight
  5. Rafal Bogacz
  6. Alan Whone
  7. Elizabeth J Coulthard  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Bristol, United Kingdom
  2. North Bristol NHS Trust, United Kingdom
  3. University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Abstract

Emerging evidence suggests that dopamine may modulate learning and memory with important implications for understanding the neurobiology of memory and future therapeutic targeting. An influential hypothesis posits that dopamine biases reinforcement learning. More recent data also suggest an influence during both consolidation and retrieval. Eighteen Parkinson’s disease patients learned through feedback ON or OFF medication with memory tested 24 hours later ON or OFF medication (4 conditions, within-subjects design with matched healthy control group). Patients OFF medication during learning decreased in memory accuracy over the following 24 hours. In contrast to previous studies, however, dopaminergic medication during learning and testing did not affect expression of positive or negative reinforcement. Two further experiments were run without the 24-hour delay, but they too failed to reproduce effects of dopaminergic medication on reinforcement learning. While supportive of a dopaminergic role in consolidation, this study failed to replicate previous findings on reinforcement learning.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. John P Grogan

    Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    john.grogan@bristol.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0463-8904
  2. Demitra Tsivos

    Clinical Neurosciences, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Laura Smith

    Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Brogan E Knight

    Clinical Neurosciences, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rafal Bogacz

    Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alan Whone

    Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Elizabeth J Coulthard

    Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    elizabeth.coulthard@bristol.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Wellcome (PhD Studentshipt SJ1102)

  • John P Grogan

BRACE (Project grant)

  • John P Grogan
  • Elizabeth J Coulthard

Medical Research Council (MC UU 12024/5)

  • Rafal Bogacz

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: Ethical approval was obtained from the NHS Research Ethics Committee at Frenchay, Bristol (09/H0107/18). All participants gave written consent, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Copyright

© 2017, Grogan et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,705
    views
  • 445
    downloads
  • 56
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. John P Grogan
  2. Demitra Tsivos
  3. Laura Smith
  4. Brogan E Knight
  5. Rafal Bogacz
  6. Alan Whone
  7. Elizabeth J Coulthard
(2017)
Effects of dopamine on reinforcement learning and consolidation in Parkinson’s disease
eLife 6:e26801.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26801

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26801

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    William T Redman, Santiago Acosta-Mendoza ... Michael J Goard
    Research Article

    Although grid cells are one of the most well-studied functional classes of neurons in the mammalian brain, whether there is a single orientation and spacing value per grid module has not been carefully tested. We analyze a recent large-scale recording of medial entorhinal cortex to characterize the presence and degree of heterogeneity of grid properties within individual modules. We find evidence for small, but robust, variability and hypothesize that this property of the grid code could enhance the encoding of local spatial information. Performing analysis on synthetic populations of grid cells, where we have complete control over the amount heterogeneity in grid properties, we demonstrate that grid property variability of a similar magnitude to the analyzed data leads to significantly decreased decoding error. This holds even when restricted to activity from a single module. Our results highlight how the heterogeneity of the neural response properties may benefit coding and opens new directions for theoretical and experimental analysis of grid cells.

    1. Neuroscience
    Maren Klingelhöfer-Jens, Katharina Hutterer ... Tina B Lonsdorf
    Research Article

    Childhood adversity is a strong predictor of developing psychopathological conditions. Multiple theories on the mechanisms underlying this association have been suggested which, however, differ in the operationalization of ‘exposure.’ Altered (threat) learning mechanisms represent central mechanisms by which environmental inputs shape emotional and cognitive processes and ultimately behavior. 1402 healthy participants underwent a fear conditioning paradigm (acquisition training, generalization), while acquiring skin conductance responses (SCRs) and ratings (arousal, valence, and contingency). Childhood adversity was operationalized as (1) dichotomization, and following (2) the specificity model, (3) the cumulative risk model, and (4) the dimensional model. Individuals exposed to childhood adversity showed blunted physiological reactivity in SCRs, but not ratings, and reduced CS+/CS- discrimination during both phases, mainly driven by attenuated CS+ responding. The latter was evident across different operationalizations of ‘exposure’ following the different theories. None of the theories tested showed clear explanatory superiority. Notably, a remarkably different pattern of increased responding to the CS- is reported in the literature for anxiety patients, suggesting that individuals exposed to childhood adversity may represent a specific sub-sample. We highlight that theories linking childhood adversity to (vulnerability to) psychopathology need refinement.