2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107595
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computational models of behavioral addictions: State of the art and future directions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 111 publications
1
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The network dynamic measures derived here are consistent with frameworks using concepts from nonlinear dynamical systems to investigate affective experiences (47, 48), psychopathology (49, 50), and substance use (51, 52). Following these studies, we may also consider the PND and NND states as attractors (i.e., stable states the brain can achieve).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The network dynamic measures derived here are consistent with frameworks using concepts from nonlinear dynamical systems to investigate affective experiences (47, 48), psychopathology (49, 50), and substance use (51, 52). Following these studies, we may also consider the PND and NND states as attractors (i.e., stable states the brain can achieve).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…These studies have demonstrated reduced cognitive control and high impulsivity levels in these individuals [31][32][33][34] . Based on this literature, one might expect that smokers would exhibit reduced planning horizon as suggested by previous computational work 6,35 . Here, formal model comparison showed that smokers engaged a similar 2-step forward thinking model as non-smoking controls, yet under-estimated the in uence of their actions on future states (lower value) compared to non-smokers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…The development of neurocomputational models has enabled us to understand the cognitive mechanisms involved in decision-making. Current findings have revealed that models relying on reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms, and Bayesian inference, which focus on vulnerabilities related to model-free and model-based control, can explain maladaptive choices despite adverse consequences in behavioral tasks such as the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) (Lin et al, 2019;Kato et al, 2023). In the current study, we aimed to explore reward-processing biases using a simpler agent model without introducing additional parameters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%