Glutamatergic Model Psychoses: Prediction Error, Learning, and Inference
This paper (2010) reviewed studies using intravenous ketamine administration to develop a model of individual variability in response to ketamine.
Authors
- John Krystal
- Philip Robert Corlett
Published
Abstract
Modulating glutamatergic neurotransmission induces alterations in conscious experience that mimic the symptoms of early psychotic illness. We review studies that use intravenous administration of ketamine, focusing on interindividual variability in the profundity of the ketamine experience. We will consider this individual variability within a hypothetical model of brain and cognitive function centered upon learning and inference. Within this model, the brains, neural systems, and even single neurons specify expectations about their inputs and responding to violations of those expectations with new learning that renders future inputs more predictable. We argue that ketamine temporarily deranges this ability by perturbing both the ways in which prior expectations are specified and the ways in which expectancy violations are signaled. We suggest that the former effect is predominantly mediated by NMDA blockade and the latter by augmented and inappropriate feedforward glutamatergic signaling. We suggest that the observed interindividual variability emerges from individual differences in neural circuits that normally underpin the learning and inference processes described. The exact source for that variability is uncertain, although it is likely to arise not only from genetic variation but also from subjects' previous experiences and prior learning. Furthermore, we argue that chronic, unlike acute, NMDA blockade alters the specification of expectancies more profoundly and permanently. Scrutinizing individual differences in the effects of acute and chronic ketamine administration in the context of the Bayesian brain model may generate new insights about the symptoms of psychosis; their underlying cognitive processes and neurocircuitry.
Research Summary of 'Glutamatergic Model Psychoses: Prediction Error, Learning, and Inference'
Introduction
Psychotomimetic compounds that perturb glutamatergic neurotransmission, notably the NMDA receptor antagonists phencyclidine (PCP) and ketamine, produce transient changes in conscious experience that resemble features of early psychotic illness. Earlier work has documented both positive-like phenomena (perceptual distortions, delusion-like ideas) and negative-like phenomena (apathy, anhedonia, cognitive blunting) after acute, subanesthetic administration, and longer-term cognitive and symptom changes after chronic recreational use. Importantly, responses vary substantially between individuals, and factors such as dose regimen, enantiomer composition, route of administration, and set and setting contribute to that variability. Corlett and colleagues set out to review empirical and theoretical evidence linking ketamine-induced psychotomimetic effects to cognitive and neural mechanisms of learning and inference. Rather than conducting a systematic audit, the paper synthesises findings from pharmacology, electrophysiology, functional neuroimaging, behavioural tasks, genetic and molecular studies, and observations from chronic users, to articulate a unifying account based on hierarchical Bayesian models of brain function. The authors aim to explain both acute and chronic effects of NMDA antagonism, to relate individual differences in baseline cognitive/neural markers to symptom susceptibility under ketamine, and to generate testable predictions relevant to endogenous psychoses and novel treatments.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Full Text PDF
Full Paper PDF
Create a free account to open full-text PDFs.
Study Details
- Study Typemeta
- Journal
- Compound
- Topics
- Authors
- APA Citation
Corlett, P. R., Honey, G. D., Krystal, J. H., & Fletcher, P. C. (2011). Glutamatergic Model Psychoses: Prediction Error, Learning, and Inference. Neuropsychopharmacology, 36(1), 294-315. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2010.163
References (4)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Bowdle, A. T., Radant, A. D., Cowley, D. S. et al. · Anesthesiology (1998)
William Deakin, J. F., Lees, J., McKie, S. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2008)
Geyer, M. A., Vollenweider, F. X. · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences (2008)
Osmond, H. · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (2010)
Cited By (6)
Papers in Blossom that reference this study
De Filippo, R., Schmitz, D. · Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews (2024)
Danböck, S. K., Duek, O., Ben-Zion, Z. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2023)
Avram, M., Rogg, H., Korda, A. et al. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2021)
Leptourgos, P., Bouttier, V., Denève, S. et al. · Psyarxiv (2021)
Grimm, O., Gass, N., Weber-Fahr, W. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2015)
Joules, R., Doyle, &. O. M., Schwarz, A. J. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2015)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.