4.5 Article

Metacognitive impairment in active cocaine use disorder is associated with individual differences in brain structure

期刊

EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 26, 期 4, 页码 653-662

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2016.02.009

关键词

Drug addiction; Metacognition; Self-awareness; Anterior cingulate cortex; Voxel-based morphometry; Magnetic resonance imaging

资金

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse [K01DA037452, R21DA040046, F32DA033088, R21DA034954]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health [R01MH090134]
  3. Sir Henry Wellcome Fellowship from the Wellcome Trust [WT096185]
  4. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
  5. Mount Sinai Brain Imaging Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dysfunctional self-awareness has been posited as a key feature of drug addiction, contributing to compromised control over addictive behaviors. In the present investigation, we showed that, compared with healthy controls (n=13) and even individuals with remitted cocaine use disorder (n=14), individuals with active cocaine use disorder (n=8) exhibited deficits in basic metacognition, defined as a weaker link between objective performance and self-reported confidence of performance on a visuo-perceptual accuracy task. This metacognitive deficit was accompanied by gray matter volume decreases, also most pronounced in individuals with active cocaine use disorder, in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex, a region necessary for this function in health. Our results thus provide a direct unbiased measurement - not relying on long-term memory or multifaceted choice behavior - of metacognition deficits in drug addiction, which are further mapped onto structural deficits in a brain region that subserves metacognitive accuracy in health and self-awareness in drug addiction. Impairments of metacognition could provide a basic mechanism underlying the higher-order self-awareness deficits in addiction, particularly among recent, active users. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. and ECNP. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据