Cited by 402Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorGambling Behavior and TreatmentsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Disruption of Reward Processing in Addiction: An Image-Based Meta-analysis of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies

Open access
Luijten, Maartje, Schellekens, Arnt F., Kühn, Simone, Machielse, Marise W. J., Sescousse, Guillaume·2017·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Disrupted reward processing, mainly driven by striatal dysfunction, is a key characteristic of addictive behaviors. However, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have reported conflicting results, with both hypoactivations and hyperactivations during anticipation and outcome notification of monetary rewards in addiction. OBJECTIVE: To determine the nature and direction of reward-processing disruptions during anticipation and outcome notification of monetary rewards in individuals with addiction using image-based meta-analyses of fMRI studies. DATA SOURCES: Relevant publications were identified searching PubMed (inclusion until March 2015) using the following terms: reward, fMRI, substance use, cocaine, cannabis, opiates, alcohol, nicotine, smokers, gambling, gamblers, gaming, and gamers. Authors of included articles were contacted to obtain statistical fMRI maps. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria: reward task involving monetary reward anticipation and/or outcome; participants showing addictive behaviors; and healthy control group. Exclusion criteria: participants aged younger than 18 years; recreational substance use or gambling; participants at risk for addictive behaviors; and studies using the same patient data as other included studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study procedures were conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Using Seed-based d Mapping software, meta-analyses were performed using random-effect nonparametric statistics with group whole brain T-maps from individual studies as input. Analyses were performed across all addictions and for substance and gambling addictions separately. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Group differences (individuals with addiction vs control individuals) in reward-related brain activation during reward anticipation and outcome using fMRI (planned before data collection). RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included in the meta-analysis, representing 643 individuals with addictive behaviors and 609 healthy control individuals. During reward anticipation, individuals with substance and gambling addictions showed decreased striatal activation compared with healthy control individuals. During reward outcome, individuals with substance addiction showed increased activation in the ventral striatum, whereas individuals with gambling addiction showed decreased activation in the dorsal striatum compared with healthy control individuals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Striatal hypoactivation in individuals with addiction during reward anticipation and in individuals with gambling addiction during reward outcome is in line with the reward-deficiency theory of addiction. However, the combination of hypoactivation during reward anticipation and hyperactivation during reward outcome in the striatum of individuals with substance addiction may be explained using learning-deficit theory.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3084

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [11]11. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011;1216(1):50-61.
  2. [23]23. Schultz W. Reward signaling by dopamine neurons. Neuroscientist. 2001;7(4):293-302.
  3. [32]32. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008-2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luijten, M., Schellekens, A. F., Kühn, S., Machielse, M. W. J., & Sescousse, G.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Luijten, Maartje
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2017-04-01
Volume
74
Issue
4
Pages
387
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2584830124
Cited by
402
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 14
FWCI
5.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
reward processing, addiction, striatal dysfunction, reward anticipation, reward outcome, monetary rewards, substance use disorders, gambling addiction, ventral striatum, dorsal striatum, brain activation
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Gambling, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Motivation, Reference Values, Reward, Software, Substance-Related Disorders, Anticipation, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review