PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Yavuz, Emre
AU  - Rodrigues, Rachel
AU  - Sanchez, Ana Pascual
AU  - Lingford-Hughes, Anne
AU  - Simplicio, Martina Di
TI  - Reward processing in young people with self-harm behaviour: an absence of motivational bias towards SH-related cues and naturalistic rewards
AID  - 10.1101/2023.12.16.23300091
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.12.16.23300091
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.16.23300091.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.16.23300091.full
AB  - Twenty percent of young people report a lifetime presence of self-harm (SH) behaviour, associated with negative health and functional outcomes. Understanding the underlying cognitive mechanisms is needed to develop targeted early interventions. Reward processing biases may underlie SH, aligning with accounts of the behaviour acquiring “addictive” characteristics. However, the specific nature of such biases remains unclear, particularly its relationship with negative affect (NA) that frequently triggers SH. In Study 1, we compared young people (aged 16-25) with SH to a group with NA but no SH history and a healthy control group on performance of a novel Incentive Delay Task (IDT), with SH-related (SH trials), positive social (social trials) or monetary images (money trials) as stimuli. In Study 2, a different sample of SH and HC participants completed the same IDT following NA induction via an online Trier Social Stress Test. For both studies, we hypothesised faster and more correct responses in the SH group than control groups on SH trials. Contradicting our hypothesis, there were no significant between-group differences in IDT performance on SH, social and money trials in either study. Certain SH characteristics (positive reinforcement, SH mental imagery, urge) were significantly correlated with better performance on SH trials in SH participants. Thus, broadly SH behaviour may not be underpinned by motivational biases towards SH-related cues or naturalistic rewards. Future studies should clarify whether incentivisation of SH-related cues instead explains individual differences in SH behaviour and its relation with treatment and prognosis.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Imperial NIHR BRC (Award P78558 to Dr Di Simplicio). This paper presents independent research funded by Imperial NIHR BRC and supported by the NIHR CRF at Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the NRES Committee South Central Oxford-C (REF: 19/SC/0275).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll materials and data are reported on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/8kcg3/). https://osf.io/8kcg3/