Reply to: A missed opportunity to examine reliability in computational psychiatry – Nature Mental Health

1. Vrizzi, S. et al. Behavioral, computational and self-reported measures of reward and punishment sensitivity as predictors of mental health characteristics. Nat. Mental Health 3, 654–666 (2025).

   Article  Google Scholar 

2. Brown, V. M. A missed opportunity to examine reliability in computational psychiatry. Nat. Mental Health https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-026-00662-0 (2025).

3. Palminteri, S. & Pessiglione, M. in Decision Neuroscience (eds Dreher, J.-C. & Tremblay, L.) 291–303 (Academic Press, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805308-9.00023-3

4. Karvelis, P., Paulus, M. P. & Diaconescu, A. O. Individual differences in computational psychiatry: a review of current challenges. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 148, 105137 (2023).

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

5. Olekhnovitch, R. et al. Using filled prescription sequences to rank antidepressants according to their acceptability in the general population: the Constances cohort. J. Psychiatr. Res. 123, 72–80 (2020).

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

6. Spijker, J. et al. Duration of major depressive episodes in the general population: results from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS). Br. J. Psychiatry 181, 208–213 (2002).

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

7. Peer, E., Rothschild, D., Gordon, A., Evernden, Z. & Damer, E. Data quality of platforms and panels for online behavioral research. Behav. Res. 54, 1643–1662 (2022).

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Stosic, M. D. et al. Careless responding: why many findings are spurious or spuriously inflate. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 7, 25152459241231581 (2024).

   Google Scholar 

9. Insel, T. et al. Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): toward a new classification framework for research on mental disorders. Am. J. Psychiatry 167, 748–751 (2010).

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

10. Fomenko, A. et al. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Anxiety subscale (HADS-A) for detecting anxiety disorders in adults. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 7, CD015456 (2025).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

11. Brown, V. M. et al. Reinforcement learning disruptions in individuals with depression and sensitivity to symptom change following cognitive behavioral therapy. JAMA Psychiatry 78, 1113–1122 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

12. Schurr, R., Reznik, D., Hillman, H., Bhui, R. & Gershman, S. J. Dynamic computational phenotyping of human cognition. Nat. Hum. Behav. 8, 917–931 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13. Robinson, O. J. & Chase, H. W. Learning and choice in mood disorders: searching for the computational parameters of anhedonia. Comput. Psychiatry 1, 208–233 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

14. Brown, V. M., Chen, J., Gillan, C. M. & Price, R. B. Improving the reliability of computational analyses: model-based planning and its relationship with compulsivity. Biol. Psychiatry Cogn. Neurosci. Neuroimaging 5, 601–609 (2020).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

15. Katahira, K., Oba, T. & Toyama, A. Does the reliability of computational models truly improve with hierarchical modeling? Some recommendations and considerations for the assessment of model parameter reliability. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 31, 2465–2486 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

16. Zorowitz, S. & Niv, Y. Improving the reliability of cognitive task measures: a narrative review. Biol. Psychiatry Cogn. Neurosci. Neuroimaging 8, 789–797 (2023).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors and Affiliations

1. PjSE CNRS UMR 8545, Paris, France

   Maël Lebreton

2. Paris School of Economics, Paris, France

   Maël Lebreton

3. Swiss Centre for Affective Science and Faculty of Psychology, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

   Maël Lebreton

4. Departement d’Etudes Cognitives, Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, Paris, France

   Stefano Vrizzi, Anis Najar & Stefano Palminteri

5. Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Computationnelles, Institut National de la Santé et Recherche Médicale, Paris, France

   Stefano Vrizzi, Anis Najar & Stefano Palminteri

6. Center for Research in Epidemiology and StatisticS (CRESS), Université Paris Cité and Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Paris, France

   Cédric Lemogne

7. Service de Psychiatrie de l’Adulte, AP-HP, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France

   Cédric Lemogne

Contributions

M.L. and S.P. conceptualized and drafted the response. S.V. and C.L. contributed key elements and supporting material. M.L., S.P., S.V., C.L. and A.N. reviewed and edited the paper.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Maël Lebreton or Stefano Palminteri.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.