Computational protocol: Neurophysiological correlates of anhedonia in feedback processing

Similar protocols

Protocol publication

[…] Performance data were analyzed by partial correlation analyses assessing the relation between POMS-depression scores and the percentage of correct adjustments after valid negative feedback and the percentage of “correct” adjustments after invalid negative feedback, while correcting for SHAPS-anhedonia scores, and vice versa (examining the relation between SHAPS scores and performance, while correcting for POMS scores).For the fMRI analyses, a model was made in which the preprocessed fMRI data were coupled to the vectors of feedback onset of each condition (valid positive feedback, valid negative feedback, invalid positive feedback, and invalid negative feedback) in both task sessions. Then two t-contrasts were computed that were used for the whole-brain analyses only: positive—negative feedback (main effect of valence), and valid—invalid feedback (main effect of validity). The individual contrast images resulting from these contrasts were used in a second-level whole-brain analysis.Whole-brain analyses were performed on the two contrasts. The POMS-depression score and the SHAPS-anhedonia score were added as covariates of interest. The POMS and SHAPS scores were both normally distributed, and were centered by the method of Delaney and Maxwell (): the mean of all participants was subtracted from individual scores. Significant voxels and clusters are reported as significant if P < 0.05 corrected with the family-wise error (FWE) approach. The Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) atlas (Tzourio-Mazoyer et al., ) was used to label the significant clusters and voxels.Of main interest were, however, the region-of-interest (ROI) analyses. Four ROI analyses were performed using MarsBaR 0.41 (Brett et al., ). The left and right RCZ [8 mm sphere around ±8, 30, 32; coordinates adopted from Mars et al., and implemented in the AAL map of MarsBaR (Tzourio-Mazoyer et al., )], the pgACC [8 mm sphere around 0, 40, −2; coordinates adopted from Nieuwenhuis et al. ()], the sgACC [8 mm sphere around 1, 32 −6; coordinates adopted from Matthews et al. ()], and the nucleus accumbens [NAcc, ±10, 12, −2, coordinates adopted from Knutson et al. ()] were defined as ROIs. Figure illustrates the ROIs examined.For the ROI analyses, beta-values were extracted from the fMRI data for each feedback condition (valid positive feedback, valid negative feedback, invalid positive feedback, and invalid negative feedback) separately. For each ROI, the extracted beta-values of each participant were exported to SPSS, and subsequently analyzed using valence (positive or negative feedback) and feedback-validity (valid or invalid feedback) as within-subjects factors in repeated-measures ANOVAs with mean-centered POMS-depression and SHAPS-anhedonia scores simultaneously added as covariates. Effects of lateralization in the RCZ and NAcc are not reported. […]

Pipeline specifications