Learning the contingencies between stimulus, action, and outcomes is disrupted in disorders associated with altered dopamine (DA) function in the BG, such as Parkinson disease (PD). Although the role of DA in learning to act has been extensively investigated in PD, the role of DA in “learning to withhold” (or inhibit) action to influence outcomes is not as well understood. The current study investigated the role of DA in learning to act or to withhold action to receive rewarding, or avoid punishing outcomes, in patients with PD tested “off” and “on” dopaminergic medication ( n = 19) versus healthy controls ( n = 30). Participants performed a reward-based learning task that orthogonalized action and outcome valence (action–reward, inaction–reward, action–punishment, inaction–punishment). We tested whether DA would bias learning toward action, toward reward, or to particular action–outcome interactions. All participants demonstrated inherent learning biases preferring action with reward and inaction to avoid punishment, and this was unaffected by medication. Instead, DA produced a complex modulation of learning less natural action–outcome associations. “Off” DA medication, patients demonstrated impairments in learning to withhold action to gain reward, suggesting a difficulty to overcome a bias toward associating inaction with punishment avoidance. On DA medication, these patterns changed, and patients showed a reduced ability to learn to act to avoid punishment, indicating a bias toward action and reward. The current findings suggest that DA in PD has a complex influence on the formation of action–outcome associations, particularly those involving less natural linkages between action and outcome valence.

Dopamine plays a key role in a range of action control processes. Here, we investigate how dopamine depletion caused by Parkinson disease (PD) and how dopamine restoring medication modulate the expression and suppression of unintended action impulses. Fifty-five PD patients and 56 healthy controls (HCs) performed an action control task (Simon task). PD patients completed the task twice, once withdrawn from dopamine medications and once while taking their medications. PD patients experienced similar susceptibility to making fast errors in conflict trials as HCs, but PD patients were less proficient compared with HCs at suppressing incorrect responses. Administration of dopaminergic medications had no effect on impulsive error rates but significantly improved the proficiency of inhibitory control in PD patients. We found no evidence that dopamine precursors and agonists affected action control in PD differently. Additionally, there was no clear evidence that individual differences in baseline action control (off dopamine medications) differentially responded to dopamine medications (i.e., no evidence for an inverted U-shaped performance curve). Together, these results indicate that dopamine depletion and restoration therapies directly modulate the reactive inhibitory control processes engaged to suppress interference from the spontaneously activated response impulses but exert no effect on an individual's susceptibility to act on impulses.

The suppression of spontaneous motor impulses is an essential facet of cognitive control that is linked to frontal-BG circuitry. BG dysfunction caused by Parkinson disease (PD) disrupts the proficiency of action suppression, but how pharmacotherapy for PD impacts impulsive motor control is poorly understood. Dopamine agonists improve motor symptoms of PD but can also provoke impulsive–compulsive behaviors (ICB). We investigated whether dopamine agonist medication has a beneficial or detrimental effect on impulsive action control in 38 PD patients, half of whom had current ICB. Participants performed the Simon conflict task, which measures susceptibility to acting on spontaneous action impulses as well as the proficiency of suppressing these impulses. Compared with an off-agonist state, patients on their agonists were no more susceptible to reacting impulsively but were less proficient at suppressing the interference from the activation of impulsive actions. Importantly, agonist effects depended on baseline performance in the off-agonist state; more proficient suppressors off agonist experienced a reduction in suppression on agonist, whereas less-proficient suppressors off agonist showed improved suppression on agonist. Patients with active ICB were actually less susceptible to making fast, impulsive response errors than patients without ICB, suggesting that behavioral problems in this subset of patients may be less related to impulsivity in motor control. Our findings provide further evidence that dopamine agonist medication impacts specific cognitive control processes and that the direction of its effects depends on individual differences in performance off medication.

Processing irrelevant visual information sometimes activates incorrect response impulses. The engagement of cognitive control mechanisms to suppress these impulses and make proactive adjustments to reduce the future impact of incorrect impulses may rely on the integrity of frontal–basal ganglia circuitry. Using a Simon task, we investigated the effects of basal ganglia dysfunction produced by Parkinson's disease (PD) on both on-line (within-trial) and proactive (between-trial) control efforts to reduce interference produced by the activation of an incorrect response. As a novel feature, we applied distributional analyses, guided by the activation–suppression model, to differentiate the strength of incorrect response activation and the proficiency of suppression engaged to counter this activation. For situations requiring on-line control, PD ( n = 52) and healthy control ( n = 30) groups showed similar mean interference effects (i.e., Simon effects) on reaction time (RT) and accuracy. Distributional analyses showed that although the strength of incorrect response impulses was similar between the groups PD patients were less proficient at suppressing these impulses. Both groups demonstrated equivalent and effective proactive control of response interference on mean RT and accuracy rates. However, PD patients were less effective at reducing the strength of incorrect response activation proactively. Among PD patients, motor symptom severity was associated with difficulties in on-line, but not in proactive, control of response impulses. These results suggest that basal ganglia dysfunction produced by PD has selective effects on cognitive control mechanisms engaged to resolve response conflict, with primary deficits in the on-line suppression of incorrect responses occurring in the context of a relatively spared ability to adjust control proactively to minimize future conflict.