Individuals with elevated symptoms of depression exhibit deficits in decision-making. Depressed individuals show decreased sensitivity to rewards, but increased sensitivity to punishments. This may be critical to understanding depressionrelated decision-making deficits, yet the computational nature of these effects is poorly understood. Participants (N=161) completed a decision-making task wherein they chose between two options on each of 150 trials. Rewards for both options were drawn from skewed-normal distributions with mean reward values of 0 points. For one option the reward distribution was positively skewed—more frequently giving losses than gains. For the other option the reward distribution was negatively skewed—more frequently giving gains than losses. Preference for the negatively-skewed option increased linearly as a function of the degree of depressive symptoms. Modeling analyses indicate that depressive symptoms are associated with less effective processing of reward magnitude and greater reliance on reward valence (gains vs. losses) in decision-making.

Procedural learning of skills depends on dopamine-mediated striatal plasticity. Most prior work investigated single stimulus-response procedural learning followed by feedback. However, many skills include several actions that must be performed before feedback is available. A new procedural-learning task is developed in which three independent and successive unsupervised categorization responses receive aggregate feedback indicating either that all three responses were correct, or at least one response was incorrect. Experiment 1 showed superior learning of stimuli in position 3, and that learning in the first two positions was initially compromised, and then recovered. An extensive theoretical analysis that used parameter space partitioning found that a large class of procedural-learning models, which predict propagation of dopamine release from feedback to stimuli, and/or an eligibility trace, fail to fully account for these data. The analysis also suggested that any dopamine released to the second or third stimulus impaired categorization learning in the first and second positions. A second experiment tested and confirmed a novel prediction of this large class of procedural-learning models that if the to-be-learned actions are introduced one-by-one in succession then learning is much better if training begins with the first action (and works forwards) than if it begins with the last action (and works backwards).

Recent studies demonstrate that interleaving the exemplars of different categories, rather than blocking exemplars by category, can enhance inductive learning-the ability to categorize new exemplars-presumably because interleaving affords discriminative contrasts between exemplars from different categories. Consistent with this view, other studies have demonstrated that decreasing between-category similarity and increasing within-category variability can eliminate or even reverse the interleaving benefit. We tested another hypothesis, one based on the dual-learning systems framework-namely, that the optimal schedule for learning categories should depend on an interaction of the cognitive system that mediates learning and the structure of the particular category being learned. Blocking should enhance rule-based category learning, which is mediated by explicit, hypothesis-testing processes, whereas interleaving should enhance information-integration category learning, which is mediated by an implicit, procedural-based learning system. Consistent with this view, we found a crossover interaction between schedule (blocked vs. interleaved) and category structure (rule-based vs. information-integration).