A common alteration in effort-based decision-making in apathy, anhedonia, and late circadian rhythm

Our bodies are regulated by an internal circadian clock that aligns physiological processes to a 24-hour day-to-night cycle. However, the timing of this rhythm can vary: some people are ‘early birds’ who prefer mornings, while others are ‘night owls’ who prefer to wake up and stay up late.

Circadian rhythms have been closely linked to neuropsychiatric conditions like depression, as well as specific psychiatric symptoms such as reduced motivation. Despite this, the circadian clock is seldom considered when investigating the cognitive and motivational changes associated with mental health conditions.

To address this gap, Mehrhof and Nord designed a study to assess motivational differences in the general population and examine whether there were associations between neuropsychiatric symptoms and circadian rhythms. The study focused on effort-based decisions – where individuals choose whether completing a task is worth the effort of the reward – as disruptions in this process often underpin motivational deficits in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Mehrhof and Nord found that individuals with high neuropsychiatric symptoms were less likely to undertake effort-based tasks, consistent with previous studies. Night owls showed the same motivational deficit – even when taking into account neuropsychiatric differences. However, this loss of motivation only occurred when the night owls were tested in the morning. When tested in the evening, their performance matched that of individuals who had an earlier circadian rhythm.

These findings suggest that the circadian clock and neuropsychiatric conditions affect motivation in independent but parallel manners. In addition, testing someone at times of day that misalign with their circadian rhythm may be skewing the results of psychiatric studies. Further research could explore whether aligning treatment schedules and daily routines to a person’s internal clock improves motivation and other mental health outcomes.

Our circadian rhythm aligns us with our environment, regulating physiological and behavioural processes to follow 24-hr rhythms (Foster, 2020). Circadian integrity is pivotal to mental wellbeing and has been bidirectionally linked to numerous psychiatric disorders (McCarthy, 2019; Logan and McClung, 2019; Walker et al., 2020; Ashton and Jagannath, 2020; Lyall et al., 2018; Vadnie and McClung, 2017; Emens et al., 2009). Yet little is known about the cognitive or computational mechanisms of circadian dysfunction—and their alignment or diversion from mechanisms driving neuropsychiatric symptoms.

Inter-individual differences in circadian timing and alignment manifest behaviourally as chronotypes (i.e., diurnal preference) (Jones et al., 2019; Bailey and Heitkemper, 2001), with individuals commonly categorized as early, late, or intermediate chronotypes (Horne and Ostberg, 1976). A disproportionate number of psychiatric patients have a late chronotype, based on self-report (Kivelä et al., 2018) and genetic analysis (Jones et al., 2019). Within clinical groups, late chronotype has been linked to depression severity and non-remission (Chan et al., 2014), higher rates of psychiatric and general medical comorbidities (Romo-Nava et al., 2020), more severe cognitive impairment, and higher symptoms of apathy (Au and Reece, 2017; Coleman and Cain, 2019). Converging evidence on the importance of circadian alignment in psychiatric pathology has led to proposals of a circadian psychiatric phenotype, either within disorders (Romo-Nava et al., 2020; McGowan and Saunders, 2021) or cutting across diagnostic categories (Carpenter et al., 2021; Crouse et al., 2021).

Syndromes of deficient motivational behaviour, such as apathy and anhedonia, are also observed across neuropsychiatric disorders (Treadway and Zald, 2011; Horan et al., 2006; Mazza et al., 2009; den Brok et al., 2015), suggesting transdiagnostic relevance (Husain and Roiser, 2018). Anhedonia and apathy are associated with worse clinical outcomes (Ducasse et al., 2018; Dimick et al., 2021) and are poorly targeted by current treatments (Calabrese et al., 2014; Gabbay et al., 2015; McMakin et al., 2012). Empirical work suggests a common underlying neurocognitive mechanism: the integration of costs and benefits during effortful decision-making (Husain and Roiser, 2018). Effort-based decision-making is commonly assessed using effort-expenditure tasks: Subjects are asked to decide whether to pursue actions associated with varying levels of effort and reward levels (Treadway et al., 2009). Computational models applied to effort-based decision-making tasks provide a formal mathematical estimate of a subject’s integration of costs and benefits into a subjective value (Treadway et al., 2012a; Pessiglione et al., 2018). Higher costs devalue associated rewards, an effect referred to as effort discounting (Sugiwaka and Okouchi, 2004; Hartmann et al., 2013; Klein-Flügge et al., 2015; Białaszek et al., 2017; Ostaszewski et al., 2013). This computational approach enables measurement of inter- and intra-individual differences on distinct aspects of effort-based decision-making.

One key source of individual differences in motivational behaviour and effort-based decision-making is likely dopamine signalling, especially dopaminergic projections from the ventral tegmental area to the ventral striatum (Husain and Roiser, 2018). Pre-clinical animal studies show dopamine depletion reduces engagement in effortful behaviour (Tran et al., 2002; Robbins et al., 1983), while dopamine enhancement promotes motivational effort exertion (Cagniard et al., 2006; Taylor and Robbins, 1984). In humans, dopamine depletion reduces willingness to exert effort for reward (Cawley et al., 2013; Venugopalan et al., 2011), while pharmacological dopamine enhancement increases motivation in effort-based decision-making (Wardle et al., 2011; Soder et al., 2021). Further, naturally occurring variations in dopamine responsivity are correlated with effort-based decision-making: a higher dopamine responsivity (as quantified with positron emission tomography following d-amphetamine administration) is associated with willingness to exert greater effort for larger rewards (Treadway et al., 2012b).

Bidirectional links between chronobiology and several neurotransmitter systems have been reported, including dopamine (Kiehn et al., 2023). In animals, dopamine transmission and biosynthesis vary diurnally (Castañeda et al., 2004; Ferris et al., 2014), and growing evidence suggests a bidirectional regulation between dopamine signalling and circadian rhythm (Weber et al., 2004; Hampp et al., 2008; Imbesi et al., 2009). In human studies, dopamine availability, dopamine transporter genes, and dopamine receptors have been linked to proxies of circadian rhythm (Holst et al., 2014; Valomon et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2021) and circadian-regulating gene polymorphisms (Shumay et al., 2012). On a behavioural level, sleep deprivation, poor sleep quality, and insomnia were linked to low motivation in effort-based decision-making (Boland et al., 2022; Boyle et al., 2020; Libedinsky et al., 2013) and evening bright-light exposure enhanced effort willingness, possibly by enhancing dopamine through melatonin suppression (Bijleveld and Knufinke, 2018). Early chronotype predicted treatment effect on motivational behaviour in a sample of depressed subjects with comorbid insomnia (Boland et al., 2019). Chronotype effects are also reported for other reward decision-making tasks, with late chronotypes showing higher delay discounting (Evans and Norbury, 2021), less rational decision-making (Correa et al., 2020), and lower willingness to take risks for rewards (Ingram et al., 2016; Hisler et al., 2023). A circadian effect on decision-making under risk is reported, with the sensitivity to losses decreasing with time-of-day (Bedder et al., 2023). This suggests that chronobiology may contribute to individual differences in effort-based decision-making, potentially in parallel ways with neuropsychiatric syndromes.

Here, we tested the relationship between motivational decision-making and three key neuropsychiatric syndromes: anhedonia, apathy, and depression, taking both a transdiagnostic and categorical (diagnostic) approach. To do this, we validate a newly developed effort-expenditure task, designed for online testing, and gamified to increase engagement. Participants completed the effort-expenditure task online, followed by a series of self-report questionnaires.

Next, we pre-registered a follow-up experiment to directly investigate how circadian preference interacts with time-of-day on motivational decision-making, using the same task and computational modelling approach. While this allows us to test how circadian effects on motivational decision-making compare to neuropsychiatric effects, we do not test for possible interactions between neuropsychiatric symptoms and chronobiology. All analyses were pre-registered (except when labelled as exploratory): see https://osf.io/2x3au and https://osf.io/y4fbe.

Various neuropsychiatric disorders are marked by disruptions in circadian rhythm, such as a late chronotype. However, research has rarely investigated how transdiagnostic mechanisms underlying neuropsychiatric conditions may relate to inter-individual differences in circadian rhythm. Here, combining a large-scale online study with computational modelling, we replicate and extend previous work linking anhedonia, apathy, and depression to a lower bias to accept effort for reward. Crucially, we found participants with a late compared to early chronotype show the same decrease in acceptance bias. Moreover, by testing participants at chronotype-compatible and -incompatible times of day, we discovered late chronotypes show a decreased acceptance bias to exert effort for reward when tested in the morning compared to evening. This reveals neuropsychiatric symptoms and chronotype (interacting with time-of-testing) show paralleling effects on effort-based decision-making. Our results demonstrate a crucial role for circadian rhythm in computational psychiatry, potentially affecting our assessment and treatment of neurocognitive mechanisms.

We replicate and extend effects of aberrant effort-based decision-making in neuropsychiatric syndromes in a large, broadly population-representative sample. Our finding that dimensional measures of apathy and anhedonia predict acceptance bias, a computational parameter describing someone’s tendency to exert effort for reward, aligns with previous reports of impaired effort-based decision-making in psychiatric (Treadway et al., 2012a; Barch et al., 2014; Berwian et al., 2020; Cléry-Melin et al., 2011; Fervaha et al., 2013; Gold et al., 2013; Hershenberg et al., 2016; Wolf et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2014; Zou et al., 2020) and neurodegenerative populations (Chong et al., 2015; Chong et al., 2018; Le Bouc et al., 2016; Le Bouc et al., 2023; Le Heron et al., 2018), as well as studies linking effort-based decision-making with apathy and anhedonia specifically. The positive link between effort-based decision-making and apathy and anhedonia has been observed in both patients (Barch et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2014; Tran et al., 2021) and HCs (Barch et al., 2014; Bonnelle et al., 2015; Jurgelis et al., 2021), though some did not find this effect (Zou et al., 2020).

Our work supports previous theories that impaired effort-based decision-making represents a common, transdiagnostic mechanism across the psychiatric and neurological syndromes of anhedonia and apathy (respectively). We found corresponding effects of apathy and anhedonia on the same computational parameter—acceptance bias—reinforcing the suggestion of possible shared mechanistic underpinnings of the two motivational syndromes (Husain and Roiser, 2018). Aberrant effort-based decision-making may manifest behaviourally as deficient motivation, a symptom category that cuts across traditional disease boundaries of psychiatric, neurological, and neurodevelopmental disorders (Pessiglione et al., 2018).

Our categorical (diagnostic-criteria based) analysis comparing depressed to healthy subjects likewise found depressed patients showed a lower acceptance bias, echoing our dimensional results in apathy and anhedonia. In addition, our categorical analysis revealed a distinct effect of group on effort sensitivity: depressed subjects had lower effort sensitivity, meaning their decisions were less influenced by effort changes. Possibly, this effect stems from decreased perceived differences in effort levels, as recently reported (Silvia et al., 2016), indicating there are both dimensional (transdiagnostic) and potentially some diagnosis-specific effects of mental health on effort-based decision-making.

It is possible that a higher acceptance bias reflects a more optimistic assessment of future task success, in line with work on the optimism bias (Korn et al., 2014); however, our task intentionally minimized unsuccessful trials by titrating effort and reward; future studies should explore this more directly.

We also found circadian effects on effort-based decision-making, paralleling those of apathy, anhedonia, and depression measures in both the affected neurocomputational parameter and the direction of effect. We observed a difference in acceptance bias between chronotypes, with late chronotypes showing a lower tendency to accept to exert effort for reward. Previous studies have suggested late chronotypes were also less accepting of delays (Evans and Norbury, 2021) and risk for reward (Ingram et al., 2016; Hisler et al., 2023).

Most importantly, we found an interaction between chronotype and time-of-day in a synchrony effect manner: early and late chronotypes showed a higher acceptance bias towards accepting effort for reward at their preferred time-of-day. This effect was driven by the late chronotype group, who showed a markedly lower acceptance bias in the morning, but a higher tendency in the evening. This suggests that chronotype effects on neurocomputational parameters such as acceptance bias depend on time-of-testing. Synchrony effects have previously been observed in other cognitive domains including inhibitory control (May and Hasher, 1998), attention (Goldstein et al., 2007), learning (Lehmann et al., 2013), and memory (Barner et al., 2019). One interpretation of our cognitive synchrony effects may be that late chronotype participants show a diminished ability to adapt to suboptimal time-of-day due to reduced cognitive resources (Nowack and Van Der Meer, 2018).

We also report a distinct effect of chronotype on effort-based decision-making that is not paralleled by effects of neuropsychiatric symptoms, nor dependent on time-of-day. Compared to early chronotypes, late chronotypes were more guided by differences in reward value, indicated by higher reward sensitivity parameters. Previous studies report altered reward functioning in late chronotypes, who show a reduced reactivity to reward in the medial prefrontal cortex, a key component of reward circuitry (Forbes et al., 2012; Hasler et al., 2013; Holm et al., 2009). Note this is not incompatible with higher reward sensitivity due to our modelling approach, in which higher reward sensitivity does not imply higher reward valuation, but rather larger subjective value differences between reward levels. Therefore, reduced reactivity to reward could be compatible with late chronotypes devaluing low reward levels more, which in our models would emerge as a reduced reward sensitivity parameter.

It is striking that the effects of neuropsychiatric symptoms on effort-based decision-making largely are paralleled by circadian effects on the same neurocomputational parameter. Exploratory analyses predicting acceptance bias by neuropsychiatric symptoms and circadian measures simultaneously indicate the effects go beyond recapitulating each other, but rather explain separable parts of the variance in acceptance bias. Overall, our results raise the possibility of altered effort–reward processing as a critical mechanism linking neuropsychiatric conditions and circadian rhythm. Previous research demonstrated depressed patients with an evening chronotype show increased diurnal mood variation (Chen et al., 2022). Our finding of time-of-day differences in acceptance bias among late chronotypes illustrates a potential cognitive underpinning for the observed diurnal characteristic within depression and late chronotype. Together, these findings support the idea of a circadian psychiatric phenotype (Romo-Nava et al., 2020; McGowan and Saunders, 2021), which should be considered in measurement (e.g., design of computational psychiatry studies) and potentially treatment (e.g., administration of motivation-based psychological interventions, which could be timed compatibly with chronotype).

To our surprise, we did not find statistical evidence for a relationship between effort-based decision-making and measures of metabolic health (BMI and risk for type-2 diabetes). Our analyses linking BMI to acceptance bias reveal a numeric effect in line with our hypothesis: a higher BMI relating to a lower acceptance bias. However, the 95% HDI for this effect narrowly included zero (95% HDI = [–0.19,0.01]). Possibly, our sample did not have sufficient variance in metabolic health to detect dimensional metabolic effects in a current general population sample. A recent study by our group investigates the same neurocomputational parameters of effort-based decision-making in participants with type-2 diabetes and non-diabetic controls matched by age, gender, and physical activity (Mehrhof et al., 2024). We report a group effect on the acceptance bias parameter, with type-2 diabetic patients showing a lower tendency to exert effort for reward.

Our study results should be considered in light of a few limitations. First, we used online self-report measures of neuropsychiatric symptoms and depression status. There has been a large shift towards online data collection in psychiatric research, and while online data are undoubtedly noisier, results (including our own, presented in the Appendix) usually show excellent accordance with lab-based studies (Gillan and Daw, 2016). Similarly, we lack biological measures of circadian rhythm, the gold standard of chronotype assessment. However, this concern might be mitigated by previous reports of high covariance between biological- and questionnaire-based circadian measures (Kantermann et al., 2015; Santisteban et al., 2018), as well as significant chronobiological differences between the questionnaire-determined chronotypes (Bailey and Heitkemper, 2001; Nebel et al., 1996) we use in our key findings. Nevertheless, future work should incorporate biological measures in attempts to replicate circadian effects on effort-based decision-making. This could take the form of identifying chronotypes by DNA analysis or dim-light melatonin onset, or continuous measurements of circadian proxies, such as core body temperature, heart rate, or actigraphy.

Note also that our time-of-day effects are limited by a between-subjects study design (i.e., the same participants were not tested in morning and evening sessions). It will be interesting to explore such diurnal variation in effort-based decision-making within individuals. The newly developed effort-expenditure task we present here may lend itself particularly well to such endeavours. First, it allows remote testing, meaning subjects can complete the task at different times of the day without in-person testing. Second, we demonstrated good test–retest reliability of task measures when time-of-testing was held constant within participants. This good test–retest reliability of our task contrasts with recent reports of poor test–retest reliability of other tasks and computational modelling parameters (Vrizzi et al., 2023).

Our reported analyses investigating neuropsychiatric and circadian effects on effort-based decision-making simultaneously are exploratory, as our study design was not ideally set out to examine this. Further work is needed to disentangle separable effects of neuropsychiatric and circadian measures on effort-based decision-making. One approach could be a group-based study design enabling the dissociation of the two effects (e.g., examining high-anhedonia participants with early chronotypes and low-anhedonia patients with late chronotypes, as well as the respective other, more common groupings, and testing each group in the morning and evening to examine time-of-day interactions with both anhedonia and chronotype).

Finally, we would like to note that as our study is based on a general population sample, rather than a clinical one. Hence, we cannot speak to transdiagnosticity on the level of multiple diagnostic categories.

Taken together, our results implicate circadian rhythm as an important factor in effort-based decision-making and its relationship to neuropsychiatric conditions. These results have implications for research, clinical interventions, and policy. We demonstrate that neuropsychiatric effects on effort-based decision-making are paralleled by effects of circadian rhythm and time-of-day. Exploratory analyses suggest these effects account for separable parts of the variance in effort-based decision-making. It unlikely that effects of neuropsychiatric effects on effort-based decision-making reported here and in previous literature are a spurious result due to multicollinearity with chronotype. Yet, not accounting for chronotype and time-of-testing, which is the predominant practice in the field, could affect results. This could take the form of either inflating or depressing results in the existing literature. On the one hand, reported neuropsychiatric effects may be inflated by systematic circadian differences between participants (i.e., overrepresentation of late chronotype in patient samples), which could be further amplified by time-of-testing (often the morning, incompatible with late chronotypes, and producing motivational impairments on neurocognitive measures). On the other hand, true effects may be masked by interactions between chronotype and time-of-day: Testing psychiatric subjects with a late chronotype in the evening (e.g., as a consequence of subject-selected testing times) may paint a false picture of group equivalence, as researchers are only observing part of a daily trajectory.

Our growing understanding of the relationship between circadian rhythm and neuropsychiatry may allow for critical advances in improving therapeutic outcomes from treatments (Bhatnagar et al., 2023; Meuret et al., 2016). Such advances are particularly called for in the case of symptoms of apathy and anhedonia, as current treatments often fail to improve motivational deficits (Calabrese et al., 2014; Gabbay et al., 2015; McMakin et al., 2012), but could potentially be coupled with a patient’s chronotype to increase efficacy. At minimum, clinical trials predicting change in motivational measures, such as effort-based decision-making, should assess patients at similar times of day, as this could reduce or inflate treatment effects.

Circadian rhythm and neuropsychiatric syndromes may affect motivation via parallel, as well as distinct, mechanisms—but crucially, this overlap is dependent on time-of-testing. Our work suggests that chronotype and time-of-testing are essential variables to consider in future effort-based decision-making experiments, particularly those measuring effort-based decision-making in patient groups, such as those with depression, high apathy, or high anhedonia. Beyond experimental work, future interventions should consider the role of chronotype in measurement and modulation of motivation.

The anonymous processed data, the R and Stan code to reproduce all simulations, analyses, and visualizations, and all experimental materials are publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/smehrhof/2024_effort_study; copy archived at Mehrhof, 2025) and published on Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15068968).

1. 1. Mehrhof SZ
   2. Nord CL

   (2025) Zenodo

   smehrhof/effort-study: eLife Publication 22/03/2025.

   https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15068968

1. 1. Ahn WY
   2. Krawitz A
   3. Kim W
   4. Busmeyer JR
   5. Brown JW

   (2011) A Model-Based fMRI analysis with hierarchical bayesian parameter estimation

   Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics 4:95–110.

   https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020684

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Ahn WY
   2. Haines N
   3. Zhang L

   (2017) Revealing neurocomputational mechanisms of reinforcement learning and decision-making With the hBayesDM Package

   Computational Psychiatry 1:24–57.

   https://doi.org/10.1162/CPSY_a_00002

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Ashton A
   2. Jagannath A

   (2020) Disrupted sleep and circadian rhythms in schizophrenia and their interaction with dopamine signaling

   Frontiers in Neuroscience 14:636.

   https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2020.00636

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Au J
   2. Reece J

   (2017) The relationship between chronotype and depressive symptoms: A meta-analysis

   Journal of Affective Disorders 218:93–104.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.04.021

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Bailey SL
   2. Heitkemper MM

   (2001) Circadian rhythmicity of cortisol and body temperature: morningness-eveningness effects

   Chronobiology International 18:249–261.

   https://doi.org/10.1081/cbi-100103189

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Barch DM
   2. Treadway MT
   3. Schoen N

   (2014) Effort, anhedonia, and function in schizophrenia: reduced effort allocation predicts amotivation and functional impairment

   Journal of Abnormal Psychology 123:387–397.

   https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036299

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Barner C
   2. Schmid SR
   3. Diekelmann S

   (2019) Time-of-day effects on prospective memory

   Behavioural Brain Research 376:112179.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2019.112179

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Bedder RL
   2. Vaghi MM
   3. Dolan RJ
   4. Rutledge RB

   (2023) Risk taking for potential losses but not gains increases with time of day

   Scientific Reports 13:5534.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31738-x

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Berwian IM
   2. Wenzel JG
   3. Collins AGE
   4. Seifritz E
   5. Stephan KE
   6. Walter H
   7. Huys QJM

   (2020) Computational mechanisms of effort and reward decisions in patients with depression and their association with relapse after antidepressant discontinuation

   JAMA Psychiatry 77:513–522.

   https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.4971

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Bhatnagar A
    2. Murray G
    3. Ray S

    (2023) Circadian biology to advance therapeutics for mood disorders

    Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 44:689–704.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tips.2023.07.008

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Białaszek W
    2. Marcowski P
    3. Ostaszewski P

    (2017) Physical and cognitive effort discounting across different reward magnitudes: Tests of discounting models

    PLOS ONE 12:e0182353.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182353

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Bijleveld E
    2. Knufinke M

    (2018) Exposure to bright light biases effort-based decisions

    Behavioral Neuroscience 132:183–193.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/bne0000244

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Boland EM
    2. Bertulis K
    3. Leong SH
    4. Thase ME
    5. Gehrman PR

    (2019) Preliminary support for the role of reward relevant effort and chronotype in the depression/insomnia comorbidity

    Journal of Affective Disorders 242:220–223.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.08.057

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Boland EM
    2. Kelley NJ
    3. Chat IK-Y
    4. Zinbarg R
    5. Craske MG
    6. Bookheimer S
    7. Nusslock R

    (2022) Poor sleep quality is significantly associated with effort but not temporal discounting of monetary rewards

    Motivation Science 8:70–76.

    https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000258

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Bonnelle V
    2. Veromann K-R
    3. Burnett Heyes S
    4. Lo Sterzo E
    5. Manohar S
    6. Husain M

    (2015) Characterization of reward and effort mechanisms in apathy

    Journal of Physiology, Paris 109:16–26.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphysparis.2014.04.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Boyle CC
    2. Cho JH
    3. Eisenberger NI
    4. Olmstead RE
    5. Piber D
    6. Sadeghi N
    7. Tazhibi M
    8. Irwin MR

    (2020) Motivation and sensitivity to monetary reward in late-life insomnia: moderating role of sex and the inflammatory marker CRP

    Neuropsychopharmacology 45:1664–1671.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-0735-7

    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Cagniard B
    2. Balsam PD
    3. Brunner D
    4. Zhuang X

    (2006) Mice with chronically elevated dopamine exhibit enhanced motivation, but not learning, for a food reward

    Neuropsychopharmacology 31:1362–1370.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp.1300966

    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Calabrese JR
    2. Fava M
    3. Garibaldi G
    4. Grunze H
    5. Krystal AD
    6. Laughren T
    7. Macfadden W
    8. Marin R
    9. Nierenberg AA
    10. Tohen M

    (2014) Methodological approaches and magnitude of the clinical unmet need associated with amotivation in mood disorders

    Journal of Affective Disorders 168:439–451.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.06.056

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Carpenter JS
    2. Crouse JJ
    3. Scott EM
    4. Naismith SL
    5. Wilson C
    6. Scott J
    7. Merikangas KR
    8. Hickie IB

    (2021) Circadian depression: A mood disorder phenotype

    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 126:79–101.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.02.045

    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Castañeda TR
    2. de Prado BM
    3. Prieto D
    4. Mora F

    (2004) Circadian rhythms of dopamine, glutamate and GABA in the striatum and nucleus accumbens of the awake rat: modulation by light

    Journal of Pineal Research 36:177–185.

    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1600-079x.2003.00114.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Cawley EI
    2. Park S
    3. aan het Rot M
    4. Sancton K
    5. Benkelfat C
    6. Young SN
    7. Boivin DB
    8. Leyton M

    (2013) Dopamine and light: dissecting effects on mood and motivational states in women with subsyndromal seasonal affective disorder

    Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience 38:388–397.

    https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.120181

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Chan JWY
    2. Lam SP
    3. Li SX
    4. Yu MWM
    5. Chan NY
    6. Zhang J
    7. Wing Y-K

    (2014) Eveningness and insomnia: independent risk factors of nonremission in major depressive disorder

    Sleep 37:911–917.

    https://doi.org/10.5665/sleep.3658

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Chen Z
    2. Zhao S
    3. Tian S
    4. Yan R
    5. Wang H
    6. Wang X
    7. Zhu R
    8. Xia Y
    9. Yao Z
    10. Lu Q

    (2022) Diurnal mood variation symptoms in major depressive disorder associated with evening chronotype: Evidence from a neuroimaging study

    Journal of Affective Disorders 298:151–159.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.10.087

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Chong TT-J
    2. Bonnelle V
    3. Manohar S
    4. Veromann K-R
    5. Muhammed K
    6. Tofaris GK
    7. Hu M
    8. Husain M

    (2015) Dopamine enhances willingness to exert effort for reward in Parkinson’s disease

    Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior 69:40–46.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.04.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Chong TT-J
    2. Bonnelle V
    3. Veromann K-R
    4. Juurmaa J
    5. Taba P
    6. Plant O
    7. Husain M

    (2018) Dissociation of reward and effort sensitivity in methcathinone-induced Parkinsonism

    Journal of Neuropsychology 12:291–297.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/jnp.12122

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Cléry-Melin M-L
    2. Schmidt L
    3. Lafargue G
    4. Baup N
    5. Fossati P
    6. Pessiglione M

    (2011) Why don’t you try harder? An investigation of effort production in major depression

    PLOS ONE 6:e23178.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023178

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Coleman MY
    2. Cain SW

    (2019) Eveningness is associated with greater subjective cognitive impairment in individuals with self-reported symptoms of unipolar depression

    Journal of Affective Disorders 256:404–415.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.05.054

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Correa Á
    2. Alguacil S
    3. Ciria LF
    4. Jiménez A
    5. Ruz M

    (2020) Circadian rhythms and decision-making: a review and new evidence from electroencephalography

    Chronobiology International 37:520–541.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2020.1715421

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Craig CL
    2. Marshall AL
    3. Sj??str??m M
    4. Bauman AE
    5. Booth ML
    6. Ainsworth BE
    7. Pratt M
    8. Ekelund U
    9. Yngve A
    10. Sallis JF
    11. Oja P

    (2003) International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity

    Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 35:1381–1395.

    https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB

    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Crouse JJ
    2. Carpenter JS
    3. Song YJC
    4. Hockey SJ
    5. Naismith SL
    6. Grunstein RR
    7. Scott EM
    8. Merikangas KR
    9. Scott J
    10. Hickie IB

    (2021) Circadian rhythm sleep-wake disturbances and depression in young people: implications for prevention and early intervention

    The Lancet. Psychiatry 8:813–823.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00034-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. de Leeuw JR

    (2015) jsPsych: A JavaScript library for creating behavioral experiments in A Web browser

    Behavior Research Methods 47:1–12.

    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0458-y

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. den Brok M
    2. van Dalen JW
    3. van Gool WA
    4. Moll van Charante EP
    5. de Bie RMA
    6. Richard E

    (2015) Apathy in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

    Movement Disorders 30:759–769.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.26208

    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Dercon Q
    2. Mehrhof SZ
    3. Sandhu TR
    4. Hitchcock C
    5. Lawson RP
    6. Pizzagalli DA
    7. Dalgleish T
    8. Nord CL

    (2024) A core component of psychological therapy causes adaptive changes in computational learning mechanisms

    Psychological Medicine 54:327–337.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291723001587

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Dimick MK
    2. Hird MA
    3. Fiksenbaum LM
    4. Mitchell RHB
    5. Goldstein BI

    (2021) Severe anhedonia among adolescents with bipolar disorder is common and associated with increased psychiatric symptom burden

    Journal of Psychiatric Research 134:200–207.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.12.031

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Dinga R
    2. Schmaal L
    3. Penninx BWJH
    4. van Tol MJ
    5. Veltman DJ
    6. van Velzen L
    7. Mennes M
    8. van der Wee NJA
    9. Marquand AF

    (2019) Evaluating the evidence for biotypes of depression: Methodological replication and extension of

    NeuroImage. Clinical 22:101796.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101796

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Ducasse D
    2. Loas G
    3. Dassa D
    4. Gramaglia C
    5. Zeppegno P
    6. Guillaume S
    7. Olié E
    8. Courtet P

    (2018) Anhedonia is associated with suicidal ideation independently of depression: a meta-analysis

    Depression and Anxiety 35:382–392.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22709

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Emens J
    2. Lewy A
    3. Kinzie JM
    4. Arntz D
    5. Rough J

    (2009) Circadian misalignment in major depressive disorder

    Psychiatry Research 168:259–261.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2009.04.009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Evans SL
    2. Norbury R

    (2021) Associations between diurnal preference, impulsivity and substance use in a young-adult student sample

    Chronobiology International 38:79–89.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2020.1810063

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Ferris MJ
    2. España RA
    3. Locke JL
    4. Konstantopoulos JK
    5. Rose JH
    6. Chen R
    7. Jones SR

    (2014) Dopamine transporters govern diurnal variation in extracellular dopamine tone

    PNAS 111:E2751–E2759.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407935111

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Fervaha G
    2. Graff-Guerrero A
    3. Zakzanis KK
    4. Foussias G
    5. Agid O
    6. Remington G

    (2013) Incentive motivation deficits in schizophrenia reflect effort computation impairments during cost-benefit decision-making

    Journal of Psychiatric Research 47:1590–1596.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.08.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. Book

    1. Fleiss JL

    (2011)

    Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments

    John Wiley & Sons.

    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Forbes EE
    2. Dahl RE
    3. Almeida JRC
    4. Ferrell RE
    5. Nimgaonkar VL
    6. Mansour H
    7. Sciarrillo SR
    8. Holm SM
    9. Rodriguez EE
    10. Phillips ML

    (2012) PER2 rs2304672 polymorphism moderates circadian-relevant reward circuitry activity in adolescents

    Biological Psychiatry 71:451–457.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.10.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Foster RG

    (2020) Sleep, circadian rhythms and health

    Interface Focus 10:20190098.

    https://doi.org/10.1098/rsfs.2019.0098

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Gabbay V
    2. Johnson AR
    3. Alonso CM
    4. Evans LK
    5. Babb JS
    6. Klein RG

    (2015) Anhedonia, but not irritability, is associated with illness severity outcomes in adolescent major depression

    Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology 25:194–200.

    https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2014.0105

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Gillan CM
    2. Daw ND

    (2016) Taking Psychiatry Research Online

    Neuron 91:19–23.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.06.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Gold JM
    2. Strauss GP
    3. Waltz JA
    4. Robinson BM
    5. Brown JK
    6. Frank MJ

    (2013) Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are associated with abnormal effort-cost computations

    Biological Psychiatry 74:130–136.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.12.022

    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Goldstein D
    2. Hahn CS
    3. Hasher L
    4. Wiprzycka UJ
    5. Zelazo PD

    (2007) Time of day, intellectual performance, and behavioral problems in morning versus evening type adolescents: is there a synchrony effect?

    Personality and Individual Differences 42:431–440.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.008

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. Preprint

    1. Haines N
    2. Kvam PD
    3. Irving LH
    4. Smith C
    5. Beauchaine TP
    6. Pitt MA
    7. Ahn WY
    8. Turner B

    (2020) Theoretically informed generative models can advance the psychological and brain sciences: lessons from the reliability paradox

    PsyArXiv.

    https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xr7y3

    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Hampp G
    2. Ripperger JA
    3. Houben T
    4. Schmutz I
    5. Blex C
    6. Perreau-Lenz S
    7. Brunk I
    8. Spanagel R
    9. Ahnert-Hilger G
    10. Meijer JH
    11. Albrecht U

    (2008) Regulation of monoamine oxidase A by circadian-clock components implies clock influence on mood

    Current Biology 18:678–683.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.04.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Hartmann MN
    2. Hager OM
    3. Tobler PN
    4. Kaiser S

    (2013) Parabolic discounting of monetary rewards by physical effort

    Behavioural Processes 100:192–196.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2013.09.014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Hasler BP
    2. Sitnick SL
    3. Shaw DS
    4. Forbes EE

    (2013) An altered neural response to reward may contribute to alcohol problems among late adolescents with an evening chronotype

    Psychiatry Research 214:357–364.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2013.08.005

    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Hershenberg R
    2. Satterthwaite TD
    3. Daldal A
    4. Katchmar N
    5. Moore TM
    6. Kable JW
    7. Wolf DH

    (2016) Diminished effort on a progressive ratio task in both unipolar and bipolar depression

    Journal of Affective Disorders 196:97–100.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.003

    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Hisler GC
    2. Dickinson DL
    3. Bruce SA
    4. Hasler BP

    (2023) Preliminary evidence that misalignment between sleep and circadian timing alters risk-taking preferences

    Journal of Sleep Research 32:e13728.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.13728

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Holm SM
    2. Forbes EE
    3. Ryan ND
    4. Phillips ML
    5. Tarr JA
    6. Dahl RE

    (2009) Reward-related brain function and sleep in pre/early pubertal and mid/late pubertal adolescents

    The Journal of Adolescent Health 45:326–334.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.04.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Holst SC
    2. Bersagliere A
    3. Bachmann V
    4. Berger W
    5. Achermann P
    6. Landolt H-P

    (2014) Dopaminergic role in regulating neurophysiological markers of sleep homeostasis in humans

    The Journal of Neuroscience 34:566–573.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4128-13.2014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Horan WP
    2. Kring AM
    3. Blanchard JJ

    (2006) Anhedonia in schizophrenia: a review of assessment strategies

    Schizophrenia Bulletin 32:259–273.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbj009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Horne JA
    2. Ostberg O

    (1976)

    A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms

    International Journal of Chronobiology 4:97–110.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Husain M
    2. Roiser JP

    (2018) Neuroscience of apathy and anhedonia: a transdiagnostic approach

    Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 19:470–484.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0029-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Imbesi M
    2. Yildiz S
    3. Dirim Arslan A
    4. Sharma R
    5. Manev H
    6. Uz T

    (2009) Dopamine receptor-mediated regulation of neuronal “clock” gene expression

    Neuroscience 158:537–544.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.10.044

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Ingram KK
    2. Ay A
    3. Kwon SB
    4. Woods K
    5. Escobar S
    6. Gordon M
    7. Smith IH
    8. Bearden N
    9. Filipowicz A
    10. Jain K

    (2016) Molecular insights into chronotype and time-of-day effects on decision-making

    Scientific Reports 6:29392.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/srep29392

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Jones SE
    2. Lane JM
    3. Wood AR
    4. van Hees VT
    5. Tyrrell J
    6. Beaumont RN
    7. Jeffries AR
    8. Dashti HS
    9. Hillsdon M
    10. Ruth KS
    11. Tuke MA
    12. Yaghootkar H
    13. Sharp SA
    14. Jie Y
    15. Thompson WD
    16. Harrison JW
    17. Dawes A
    18. Byrne EM
    19. Tiemeier H
    20. Allebrandt KV
    21. Bowden J
    22. Ray DW
    23. Freathy RM
    24. Murray A
    25. Mazzotti DR
    26. Gehrman PR
    27. Lawlor DA
    28. Frayling TM
    29. Rutter MK
    30. Hinds DA
    31. Saxena R
    32. Weedon MN

    (2019) Genome-wide association analyses of chronotype in 697,828 individuals provides insights into circadian rhythms

    Nature Communications 10:343.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-08259-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Jurgelis M
    2. Chong WB
    3. Atkins KJ
    4. Cooper PS
    5. Coxon JP
    6. Chong TT-J

    (2021) Heightened effort discounting is a common feature of both apathy and fatigue

    Scientific Reports 11:22283.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01287-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Kantermann T
    2. Sung H
    3. Burgess HJ

    (2015) Comparing the morningness-eveningness questionnaire and munich chronotype questionnaire to the dim light melatonin onset

    Journal of Biological Rhythms 30:449–453.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/0748730415597520

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Kiehn JT
    2. Faltraco F
    3. Palm D
    4. Thome J
    5. Oster H

    (2023) Circadian clocks in the regulation of neurotransmitter systems

    Pharmacopsychiatry 56:108–117.

    https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1027-7055

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Kivelä L
    2. Papadopoulos MR
    3. Antypa N

    (2018) Chronotype and psychiatric disorders

    Current Sleep Medicine Reports 4:94–103.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40675-018-0113-8

    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Klein-Flügge MC
    2. Kennerley SW
    3. Saraiva AC
    4. Penny WD
    5. Bestmann S

    (2015) Behavioral modeling of human choices reveals dissociable effects of physical effort and temporal delay on reward devaluation

    PLOS Computational Biology 11:e1004116.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Korn CW
    2. Sharot T
    3. Walter H
    4. Heekeren HR
    5. Dolan RJ

    (2014) Depression is related to an absence of optimistically biased belief updating about future life events

    Psychological Medicine 44:579–592.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291713001074

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Le Bouc R
    2. Rigoux L
    3. Schmidt L
    4. Degos B
    5. Welter M-L
    6. Vidailhet M
    7. Daunizeau J
    8. Pessiglione M

    (2016) Computational dissection of dopamine motor and motivational functions in humans

    The Journal of Neuroscience 36:6623–6633.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3078-15.2016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Le Bouc R
    2. Borderies N
    3. Carle G
    4. Robriquet C
    5. Vinckier F
    6. Daunizeau J
    7. Azuar C
    8. Levy R
    9. Pessiglione M

    (2023) Effort avoidance as a core mechanism of apathy in frontotemporal dementia

    Brain 146:712–726.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awac427

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Le Heron C
    2. Plant O
    3. Manohar S
    4. Ang Y-S
    5. Jackson M
    6. Lennox G
    7. Hu MT
    8. Husain M

    (2018) Distinct effects of apathy and dopamine on effort-based decision-making in Parkinson’s disease

    Brain 141:1455–1469.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awy110

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Lecrubier Y
    2. Sheehan D
    3. Weiller E
    4. Amorim P
    5. Bonora I
    6. Sheehan KH
    7. Janavs J
    8. Dunbar G

    (1997) The MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). A short diagnostic structured interview: reliability and validity according to the CIDI

    European Psychiatry 12:224–231.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-9338(97)83296-8

    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Lehmann CA
    2. Marks ADG
    3. Hanstock TL

    (2013) Age and synchrony effects in performance on the rey auditory verbal learning test

    International Psychogeriatrics 25:657–665.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610212002013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Libedinsky C
    2. Massar SAA
    3. Ling A
    4. Chee W
    5. Huettel SA
    6. Chee MWL

    (2013) Sleep deprivation alters effort discounting but not delay discounting of monetary rewards

    Sleep 36:899–904.

    https://doi.org/10.5665/sleep.2720

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Lindström J
    2. Tuomilehto J

    (2003) The diabetes risk score

    Diabetes Care 26:725–731.

    https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.26.3.725

    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Logan RW
    2. McClung CA

    (2019) Rhythms of life: circadian disruption and brain disorders across the lifespan

    Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 20:49–65.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0088-y

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Lyall LM
    2. Wyse CA
    3. Graham N
    4. Ferguson A
    5. Lyall DM
    6. Cullen B
    7. Celis Morales CA
    8. Biello SM
    9. Mackay D
    10. Ward J
    11. Strawbridge RJ
    12. Gill JMR
    13. Bailey MES
    14. Pell JP
    15. Smith DJ

    (2018) Association of disrupted circadian rhythmicity with mood disorders, subjective wellbeing, and cognitive function: a cross-sectional study of 91 105 participants from the UK Biobank

    The Lancet. Psychiatry 5:507–514.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30139-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Marin RS
    2. Biedrzycki RC
    3. Firinciogullari S

    (1991) Reliability and validity of the apathy evaluation scale

    Psychiatry Research 38:143–162.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1781(91)90040-v

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. May CP
    2. Hasher L

    (1998) Synchrony effects in inhibitory control over thought and action

    Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 24:363–379.

    https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.24.2.363

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Mazza M
    2. Squillacioti MR
    3. Pecora RD
    4. Janiri L
    5. Bria P

    (2009) Effect of aripiprazole on self-reported anhedonia in bipolar depressed patients

    Psychiatry Research 165:193–196.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2008.05.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. McCarthy MJ

    (2019) Missing a beat: assessment of circadian rhythm abnormalities in bipolar disorder in the genomic era

    Psychiatric Genetics 29:29–36.

    https://doi.org/10.1097/YPG.0000000000000215

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. McGowan NM
    2. Saunders KEA

    (2021) The emerging circadian phenotype of borderline personality disorder: mechanisms, opportunities and future directions

    Current Psychiatry Reports 23:30.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-021-01236-w

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. McMakin DL
    2. Olino TM
    3. Porta G
    4. Dietz LJ
    5. Emslie G
    6. Clarke G
    7. Wagner KD
    8. Asarnow JR
    9. Ryan ND
    10. Birmaher B
    11. Shamseddeen W
    12. Mayes T
    13. Kennard B
    14. Spirito A
    15. Keller M
    16. Lynch FL
    17. Dickerson JF
    18. Brent DA

    (2012) Anhedonia predicts poorer recovery among youth with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment–resistant depression

    Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 51:404–411.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2012.01.011

    • Google Scholar
83. Website

    1. McManus S
    2. Bebbington PE
    3. Jenkins R
    4. Brugha T

    (2016) Mental Health and Wellbeing in England: The Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey

    Accessed August 15, 2022.

    https://files.digital.nhs.uk/pdf/q/3/mental_health_and_wellbeing_in_england_full_report.pdf
84. Preprint

    1. Mehrhof SZ
    2. Fleming HA
    3. Nord C

    (2024) A Cognitive Signature of Metabolic Health in Effort-Based Decision-Making

    PsyArXiv.

    https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4bkm9

    • Google Scholar
85. Software

    1. Mehrhof S

    (2025) 2024_effort_study, version swh:1:rev:80f3557d5fe4e159c46866d3259d05299d71660f

    Software Heritage.

    https://archive.softwareheritage.org/swh:1:dir:add778a0cd2d10c51f314da1962b73e55671ce81;origin=https://github.com/smehrhof/2024_effort_study;visit=swh:1:snp:b14645657e187a0b4bc6aacb1c8c61df0d8d3f85;anchor=swh:1:rev:80f3557d5fe4e159c46866d3259d05299d71660f
86. 1. Meuret AE
    2. Rosenfield D
    3. Bhaskara L
    4. Auchus R
    5. Liberzon I
    6. Ritz T
    7. Abelson JL

    (2016) Timing matters: Endogenous cortisol mediates benefits from early-day psychotherapy

    Psychoneuroendocrinology 74:197–202.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.09.008

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Mkrtchian A
    2. Valton V
    3. Roiser JP

    (2023) Reliability of decision-making and reinforcement learning computational parameters

    Computational Psychiatry 7:30–46.

    https://doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.86

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Nebel LE
    2. Howell RH
    3. Krantz DS
    4. Falconer JJ
    5. Gottdiener JS
    6. Gabbay FH

    (1996) The circadian variation of cardiovascular stress levels and reactivity: relationship to individual differences in morningness/eveningness

    Psychophysiology 33:273–281.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb00424.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Nowack K
    2. Van Der Meer E

    (2018) The synchrony effect revisited: chronotype, time of day and cognitive performance in a semantic analogy task

    Chronobiology International 35:1647–1662.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/07420528.2018.1500477

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. Book

    1. Office of National Statistics

    (2016)

    CT0570_2011 Census—Sex by Age by IMD2004 by Ethnic Group

    Census India.

    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Ostaszewski P
    2. Bąbel P
    3. Swebodziński B

    (2013) Physical and cognitive effort discounting of hypothetical monetary rewards

    Japanese Psychological Research 55:329–337.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/jpr.12019

    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Palan S
    2. Schitter C

    (2018) Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments

    Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance 17:22–27.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004

    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Pessiglione M
    2. Vinckier F
    3. Bouret S
    4. Daunizeau J
    5. Le Bouc R

    (2018) Why not try harder? Computational approach to motivation deficits in neuro-psychiatric diseases

    Brain 141:629–650.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awx278

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Rizvi SJ
    2. Quilty LC
    3. Sproule BA
    4. Cyriac A
    5. Michael Bagby R
    6. Kennedy SH

    (2015) Development and validation of the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS) in a community sample and individuals with major depression

    Psychiatry Research 229:109–119.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.07.062

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Robbins TW
    2. Roberts DC
    3. Koob GF

    (1983)

    Effects of d-amphetamine and apomorphine upon operant behavior and schedule-induced licking in rats with 6-hydroxydopamine-induced lesions of the nucleus accumbens

    The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 224:662–673.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Roenneberg T
    2. Wirz-Justice A
    3. Merrow M

    (2003) Life between clocks: daily temporal patterns of human chronotypes

    Journal of Biological Rhythms 18:80–90.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/0748730402239679

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Roenneberg T
    2. Pilz LK
    3. Zerbini G
    4. Winnebeck EC

    (2019) Chronotype and social jetlag: a (self-) critical review

    Critical Review. Biology 8:54.

    https://doi.org/10.3390/biology8030054

    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Romo-Nava F
    2. Blom TJ
    3. Cuellar-Barboza AB
    4. Winham SJ
    5. Colby CL
    6. Nunez NA
    7. Biernacka JM
    8. Frye MA
    9. McElroy SL

    (2020) Evening chronotype as a discrete clinical subphenotype in bipolar disorder

    Journal of Affective Disorders 266:556–562.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.151

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Santisteban JA
    2. Brown TG
    3. Gruber R

    (2018) Association between the munich chronotype questionnaire and wrist actigraphy

    Sleep Disorders 2018:5646848.

    https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5646848

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Shumay E
     2. Fowler JS
     3. Wang GJ
     4. Logan J
     5. Alia-Klein N
     6. Goldstein RZ
     7. Maloney T
     8. Wong C
     9. Volkow ND

     (2012) Repeat variation in the human PER2 gene as a new genetic marker associated with cocaine addiction and brain dopamine D2 receptor availability

     Translational Psychiatry 2:e86.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2012.11

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Silvia PJ
     2. Mironovová Z
     3. McHone AN
     4. Sperry SH
     5. Harper KL
     6. Kwapil TR
     7. Eddington KM

     (2016) Do depressive symptoms “blunt” effort? An analysis of cardiac engagement and withdrawal for an increasingly difficult task

     Biological Psychology 118:52–60.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2016.04.068

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Snaith RP
     2. Hamilton M
     3. Morley S
     4. Humayan A
     5. Hargreaves D
     6. Trigwell P

     (1995) A scale for the assessment of hedonic tone the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale

     The British Journal of Psychiatry 167:99–103.

     https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.167.1.99

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Soder HE
     2. Cooper JA
     3. Lopez-Gamundi P
     4. Hoots JK
     5. Nunez C
     6. Lawlor VM
     7. Lane SD
     8. Treadway MT
     9. Wardle MC

     (2021) Dose-response effects of d-amphetamine on effort-based decision-making and reinforcement learning

     Neuropsychopharmacology 46:1078–1085.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-0779-8

     • Google Scholar
104. Book

     1. Stan Development Team

     (2021)

     Stan modelling language users guide and reference manual

     Stan Development Team.

     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Sugiwaka H
     2. Okouchi H

     (2004) Reformative self‐control and discounting of reward value by delay or effort ¹

     Japanese Psychological Research 46:1–9.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5884.2004.00231.x

     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Taylor JR
     2. Robbins TW

     (1984) Enhanced behavioural control by conditioned reinforcers following microinjections of d-amphetamine into the nucleus accumbens

     Psychopharmacology 84:405–412.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00555222

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Tran AH
     2. Tamura R
     3. Uwano T
     4. Kobayashi T
     5. Katsuki M
     6. Matsumoto G
     7. Ono T

     (2002) Altered accumbens neural response to prediction of reward associated with place in dopamine D2 receptor knockout mice

     PNAS 99:8986–8991.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.132284599

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
108. 1. Tran T
     2. Hagen AEF
     3. Hollenstein T
     4. Bowie CR

     (2021) Physical- and cognitive-effort-based decision-making in depression: relationships to symptoms and functioning

     Clinical Psychological Science 9:53–67.

     https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702620949236

     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Treadway MT
     2. Buckholtz JW
     3. Schwartzman AN
     4. Lambert WE
     5. Zald DH

     (2009) Worth the “EEfRT”? The effort expenditure for rewards task as an objective measure of motivation and anhedonia

     PLOS ONE 4:e6598.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006598

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
110. 1. Treadway MT
     2. Zald DH

     (2011) Reconsidering anhedonia in depression: Lessons from translational neuroscience

     Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 35:537–555.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.06.006

     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Treadway MT
     2. Bossaller NA
     3. Shelton RC
     4. Zald DH

     (2012a) Effort-based decision-making in major depressive disorder: A translational model of motivational anhedonia

     Journal of Abnormal Psychology 121:553–558.

     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028813

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Treadway MT
     2. Buckholtz JW
     3. Cowan RL
     4. Woodward ND
     5. Li R
     6. Ansari MS
     7. Baldwin RM
     8. Schwartzman AN
     9. Kessler RM
     10. Zald DH

     (2012b) Dopaminergic mechanisms of individual differences in human effort-based decision-making

     The Journal of Neuroscience 32:6170–6176.

     https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6459-11.2012

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Vadnie CA
     2. McClung CA

     (2017) Circadian rhythm disturbances in mood disorders: insights into the role of the suprachiasmatic nucleus

     Neural Plasticity 2017:1504507.

     https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1504507

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Valomon A
     2. Holst SC
     3. Bachmann V
     4. Viola AU
     5. Schmidt C
     6. Zürcher J
     7. Berger W
     8. Cajochen C
     9. Landolt H-P

     (2014) Genetic polymorphisms of DAT1 and COMT differentially associate with actigraphy-derived sleep-wake cycles in young adults

     Chronobiology International 31:705–714.

     https://doi.org/10.3109/07420528.2014.896376

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Venugopalan VV
     2. Casey KF
     3. O’Hara C
     4. O’Loughlin J
     5. Benkelfat C
     6. Fellows LK
     7. Leyton M

     (2011) Acute phenylalanine/tyrosine depletion reduces motivation to smoke cigarettes across stages of addiction

     Neuropsychopharmacology 36:2469–2476.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2011.135

     • Google Scholar
116. Preprint

     1. Vrizzi S
     2. Najar A
     3. Lemogne C
     4. Palminteri S
     5. Lebreton M

     (2023) Comparing the Test-Retest Reliability of Behavioral, Computational and Self-Reported Individual Measures of Reward and Punishment Sensitivity in Relation to Mental Health Symptoms

     PsyArXiv.

     https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/3u4gp

     • Google Scholar
117. 1. Walker WH
     2. Walton JC
     3. DeVries AC
     4. Nelson RJ

     (2020) Circadian rhythm disruption and mental health

     Translational Psychiatry 10:28.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-0694-0

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
118. 1. Wardle MC
     2. Treadway MT
     3. Mayo LM
     4. Zald DH
     5. de Wit H

     (2011) Amping up effort: effects of d-amphetamine on human effort-based decision-making

     The Journal of Neuroscience 31:16597–16602.

     https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4387-11.2011

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
119. 1. Weber M
     2. Lauterburg T
     3. Tobler I
     4. Burgunder JM

     (2004) Circadian patterns of neurotransmitter related gene expression in motor regions of the rat brain

     Neuroscience Letters 358:17–20.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2003.12.053

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
120. 1. Wolf DH
     2. Satterthwaite TD
     3. Kantrowitz JJ
     4. Katchmar N
     5. Vandekar L
     6. Elliott MA
     7. Ruparel K

     (2014) Amotivation in schizophrenia: integrated assessment with behavioral, clinical, and imaging measures

     Schizophrenia Bulletin 40:1328–1337.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbu026

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
121. 1. Yang X
     2. Huang J
     3. Zhu C
     4. Wang Y
     5. Cheung EFC
     6. Chan RCK
     7. Xie G

     (2014) Motivational deficits in effort-based decision making in individuals with subsyndromal depression, first-episode and remitted depression patients

     Psychiatry Research 220:874–882.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.056

     • Google Scholar
122. 1. Zhang R
     2. Manza P
     3. Tomasi D
     4. Kim SW
     5. Shokri-Kojori E
     6. Demiral SB
     7. Kroll DS
     8. Feldman DE
     9. McPherson KL
     10. Biesecker CL
     11. Wang G-J
     12. Volkow ND

     (2021) Dopamine D1 and D2 receptors are distinctly associated with rest-activity rhythms and drug reward

     The Journal of Clinical Investigation 131:e149722.

     https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI149722

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
123. 1. Zou Y-M
     2. Ni K
     3. Wang Y-Y
     4. Yu E-Q
     5. Lui SSY
     6. Zhou F-C
     7. Yang H-X
     8. Cohen AS
     9. Strauss GP
     10. Cheung EFC
     11. Chan RCK

     (2020) Effort-cost computation in a transdiagnostic psychiatric sample: differences among patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder

     PsyCh Journal 9:210–222.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.316

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Sara Z Mehrhof

   MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Data curation, Software, Formal analysis, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing – review and editing

   For correspondence

   sara.mehrhof@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8267-3898

2. Camilla L Nord

   1. MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
   2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9281-3417

• 3,342

  views

• 91

  downloads

• 1

  citation

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

Citations by DOI

• 1

  citation for Reviewed Preprint v1 https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.96803.1