Striatal reactivity during emotion and reward relates to approach-avoidance conflict behaviour and is altered in adults with anxiety or depression

Placing Approach-Avoidance Conflict Within the Framework of Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning

Many psychiatric disorders are marked by impaired decision-making during an approach-avoidance conflict. Current experiments elicit approach-avoidance conflicts in bandit tasks by pairing an individual's actions with consequences that are simultaneously desirable (reward) and undesirable (harm). We frame approach-avoidance conflict tasks as a multi-objective multi-armed bandit. By defining a general decision-maker as a limiting sequence of actions, we disentangle the decision process from learning. Each decision maker can then be identified as a multi-dimensional point representing its long-term average expected outcomes, while different decision making models can be associated by the geometry of their 'feasible region', the set of all possible long term performances on a fixed task. We introduce three example decision-makers based on popular reinforcement learning models and characterize their feasible regions, including whether they can be Pareto optimal. From this perspective, we find that existing tasks are unable to distinguish between the three examples of decision-makers. We show how to design new tasks whose geometric structure can be used to better distinguish between decision-makers. These findings are expected to guide the design of approach-avoidance conflict tasks and the modeling of resulting decision-making behavior.

Quantifying aberrant approach-avoidance conflict in psychopathology: A review of computational approaches

Making effective decisions during approach-avoidance conflict is critical in daily life. Aberrant decision-making during approach-avoidance conflict is evident in a range of psychological disorders, including anxiety, depression, trauma-related disorders, substance use disorders, and alcohol use disorders. To help clarify etiological pathways and reveal novel intervention targets, clinical research into decision-making is increasingly adopting a computational psychopathology approach. This approach uses mathematical models that can identify specific decision-making related processes that are altered in mental health disorders. In our review, we highlight foundational approach-avoidance conflict research, followed by more in-depth discussion of computational approaches that have been used to model behavior in these tasks. Specifically, we describe the computational models that have been applied to approach-avoidance conflict (e.g., drift-diffusion, active inference, and reinforcement learning models), and provide resources to guide clinical researchers who may be interested in applying computational modeling. Finally, we identify notable gaps in the current literature and potential future directions for computational approaches aimed at identifying mechanisms of approach-avoidance conflict in psychopathology.