Psychometric validation and clinical correlates of an experiential foraging task.

Measuring the function of decision-making systems is a central goal of computational psychiatry. Individual measures of decisional function could be used to describe neurocognitive profiles that underpin psychopathology and offer insights into deficits that are shared across traditional diagnostic classes. However, there are few demonstrably reliable and mechanistically relevant metrics of decision making that can accurately capture the complex overlapping domains of cognition whilst also quantifying the heterogeneity of function between individuals. The WebSurf task is a reverse-translational human experiential foraging paradigm which indexes naturalistic and clinically relevant decision-making. To determine its potential clinical utility, we examined the psychometric properties and clinical correlates of behavioural parameters extracted from WebSurf in an initial exploratory experiment and a pre-registered validation experiment. Behaviour was stable over repeated administrations of the task, as were individual differences. The ability to measure decision making consistently supports the potential utility of the task in predicting an individual's propensity for response to psychiatric treatment, in evaluating clinical change during treatment, and in defining neurocognitive profiles that relate to psychopathology. Specific aspects of WebSurf behaviour also correlate with anhedonic and externalising symptoms. Importantly, these behavioural parameters may measure dimensions of psychological variance that are not captured by traditional rating scales. WebSurf and related paradigms might therefore be useful platforms for computational approaches to precision psychiatry.