Roles of "wanting" and "liking" in motivating behavior: gambling, food, and drug addictions
Abstract
The motivation to seek out and consume rewards has evolutionarily been driven by the urge to fulfill physiological needs. However in a modern society dominated more by plenty than scarcity, we tend to think of motivation as fueled by the search for pleasure. Here, we argue that two separate but interconnected subcortical and unconscious processes direct motivation: "wanting" and "liking." These two psychological and neuronal processes and their related brain structures typically work together, but can become dissociated, particularly in cases of addiction. In drug addiction, for example, repeated consumption of addictive drugs sensitizes the mesolimbic dopamine system, the primary component of the "wanting" system, resulting in excessive "wanting" for drugs and their cues. This sensitizing process is long-lasting and occurs independently of the "liking" system, which typically remains unchanged or may develop a blunted pleasure response to the drug. The result is excessive drug-taking despite minimal pleasure and intense cue-triggered craving that may promote relapse long after detoxification. Here, we describe the roles of "liking" and "wanting" in general motivation and review recent evidence for a dissociation of "liking" and "wanting" in drug addiction, known as the incentive sensitization theory (Robinson and Berridge 1993). We also make the case that sensitization of the "wanting" system and the resulting dissociation of "liking" and "wanting" occurs in both gambling disorder and food addiction.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Robinson et al. (2015) use wanting to refer to visceral feeling of desire.
“Robinson et al. (2015) use “wanting” to refer to “visceral feeling of desire” (p. 107).”
From Can Damasio's Somatic Marker Hypothesis Explain More Than Its Originator Will Admit? (2021) · cites this paper as Robinson et al. (2015)
Activity in this pathway is particularly sensitive to novelty and uncertainty of reward.
“Activity in this pathway is particularly sensitive to novelty and uncertainty of reward, something researched extensively in gambling (Robinson et al., 2015).”
From A motivation model of sex addiction – Relevance to the controversy over the concept (2022) · cites this paper as Robinson et al., 2015
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 197 · Cited by 247
- Authors
- Robinson, M. J. F., Fischer, A. M., Ahuja, A., Lesser, E. N., & Maniates, H.
- Affiliations
- Wesleyan University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robinson, M. J. F.
- Venue
- Current topics in behavioral neurosciences
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 27
- Pages
- 105-136
- ISSN
- 1866-3370 (ISSN-L)
- 1866-3389
- OpenAlex
- W1789225984
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 197
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 44.87
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Current topics in behavioral neurosciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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
- wanting, liking, motivation, incentive sensitization, drug addiction, gambling addiction, food addiction, mesolimbic dopamine system, reward, craving, relapse
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Emotions, Food, Gambling, Humans, Hyperphagia, Motivation, Obesity, Reward, Behavior, Addictive, Substance-Related Disorders
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