Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct;47(10):2992-3006.
doi: 10.1007/s10803-017-3220-3.

Vicarious Effort-Based Decision-Making in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Maya G Mosner  1 , Jessica L Kinard  2 , Sean McWeeny  3 , Jasmine S Shah  3 , Nathan D Markiewitz  3 , Cara R Damiano-Goodwin  4 , Margaret R Burchinal  5 , Helena J V Rutherford  6 , Rachel K Greene  3 , Michael T Treadway  7 , Gabriel S Dichter  3   2   8
Affiliations

Vicarious Effort-Based Decision-Making in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Maya G Mosner et al. J Autism Dev Disord. 2017 Oct.

Abstract

This study investigated vicarious effort-based decision-making in 50 adolescents with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) compared to 32 controls using the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task. Participants made choices to win money for themselves or for another person. When choosing for themselves, the ASD group exhibited relatively similar patterns of effort-based decision-making across reward parameters. However, when choosing for another person, the ASD group demonstrated relatively decreased sensitivity to reward magnitude, particularly in the high magnitude condition. Finally, patterns of responding in the ASD group were related to individual differences in consummatory pleasure capacity. These findings indicate atypical vicarious effort-based decision-making in ASD and more broadly add to the growing body of literature addressing social reward processing deficits in ASD.

Keywords: Autism spectrum disorder; Effort-based decision-making; Social motivation; Vicarious reward.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest MTT has consulted for the Boston Consulting Group, Avanir Pharmaceuticals and NeuroCogTrials. No funding or sponsorship was provided by these companies for the current work, and all views expressed herein are solely those of authors. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic diagram of a single trial of the modified version of the Effort Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT): a Participants were told whether they were “Choosing for Self” or “Choosing for Other.” b Participants were shown a 1 s fixation cue. c Unlimited choice period in which participants were presented with information regarding the reward magnitude of the hard task for that trial, and the probability of receiving any reward for that trial. d One-second “ready” screen. e Participants made rapid button presses to complete the chosen task for 7 s (easy task) or 21 s (hard task). f Participants received feedback on whether they completed the task. g Participants received reward feedback indicating whether and how much reward they received for that trial
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The influence of reward magnitude on the percentage of hard task choices for Self (left) and Other (right). Asterisks reflect significant within-group, between-condition effects (p < 0.05). Brackets indicate significant between-group, within-condition effects (p < 0.05)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The influence of reward probability on the percentage of hard task choices for Self (left) and Other (right). Asterisks reflect significant within-group, between-condition effects (p < 0.05). Brackets indicate significant between-group, within-condition effects (p < 0.05)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Correlations between TEPS-C and the percentage of hard task choices for oneself for the Small, Medium, and Large reward magnitude conditions
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Correlations with TEPS-C and the percentage of hard task choices for oneself for the Low, Medium, and High reward probability conditions
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Correlations between TEPS-C and the percentage of hard task choices for another person for the Small, Medium, and Large reward magnitude conditions
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Correlations with TEPS-C and the percentage of hard task choices for another person for the Low, Medium, and High reward probability conditions
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
    1. Apps MA, Lesage E, Ramnani N. Vicarious reinforcement learning signals when instructing others. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2015;35(7):2904–2913. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3669-14.2015. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apps MA, Ramnani N. The anterior cingulate gyrus signals the net value of others’ rewards. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2014;34(18):6190–6200. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2701-13.2014. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apps MA, Rushworth MF, Chang SW. The anterior cingulate gyrus and social cognition: Tracking the motivation of others. Neuron. 2016;90(4):692–707. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.04.018. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Axelrod BN. Validity of the Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence and other very short forms of estimating intellectual functioning. Assessment. 2002;9(1):17–23. - PubMed