The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reward uncertainty enhances incentive salience attribution as sign-tracking
Open accessAbstract
Conditioned stimuli (CSs) come to act as motivational magnets following repeated association with unconditioned stimuli (UCSs) such as sucrose rewards. By traditional views, the more reliably predictive a Pavlovian CS-UCS association, the more the CS becomes attractive. However, in some cases, less predictability might equal more motivation. Here we examined the effect of introducing uncertainty in CS-UCS association on CS strength as an attractive motivation magnet. In the present study, Experiment 1 assessed the effects of Pavlovian predictability versus uncertainty about reward probability and/or reward magnitude on the acquisition and expression of sign-tracking (ST) and goal-tracking (GT) responses in an autoshaping procedure. Results suggested that uncertainty produced strongest incentive salience expressed as sign-tracking. Experiment 2 examined whether a within-individual temporal shift from certainty to uncertainty conditions could produce a stronger CS motivational magnet when uncertainty began, and found that sign-tracking still increased after the shift. Overall, our results support earlier reports that ST responses become more pronounced in the presence of uncertainty regarding CS-UCS associations, especially when uncertainty combines both probability and magnitude. These results suggest that Pavlovian uncertainty, although diluting predictability, is still able to enhance the incentive motivational power of particular CSs.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“It is thought that reward uncertainty, like drugs of abuse, may also sensitize neural systems to rewards and reward-related cues (Anselme & Robinson, 2013; Anselme, Robinson, & Berridge, 2013; Berridge, 2007; Mascia et al., 2018; M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Fischer, & Berridge, 2014a; Rømer Thomsen et al., 2014).”
From Cued for Risk: Evidence for an Incentive Sensitization Framework to Explain the Interplay between Stress and Anxiety, Substance Abuse, and Reward Uncertainty in Disordered Gambling Behavior (2019) · cites this paper as Anselme, Robinson, & Berridge, 2013
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rescorla, R. A. (1972) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,268
Predictive reward signal of dopamine neurons
Schultz, W. (1998) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1998.80.1.1 · Cited by 4,564
What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience?
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(98)00019-8 · Cited by 4,127
Self-citationPearce, J. M., & Hall, G. (1980) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.87.6.532 · Cited by 3,023
A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0076778 · Cited by 2,733
The debate over dopamine’s role in reward: the case for incentive salience
Berridge, K. C. (2007) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0578-x · Cited by 2,347 · cited 2×
“[6] Berridge KC.”
BackgroundSelf-citationDiscrete coding of reward probability and uncertainty by dopamine neurons
Fiorillo, C. D., Tobler, P. N., & Schultz, W. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1077349 · Cited by 2,085
A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning
Montague, P., Dayan, P., & Sejnowski, T. (1996) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.16-05-01936.1996 · Cited by 2,066
The psychology and neurobiology of addiction: an incentive–sensitization view
Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2000) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.95.8s2.19.x · Cited by 1,507
Self-citationIkemoto, S., & Panksepp, J. (1999) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(99)00023-5 · Cited by 1,450
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Roles of "wanting" and "liking" in motivating behavior: gambling, food, and drug addictions
Robinson, M. J. F., Fischer, A. M., Ahuja, A., Lesser, E. N., & Maniates, H. (2015) · Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · doi:10.1007/7854_2015_387 · Cited by 247
Self-citationLawrence, N., Verbruggen, F., Morrison, S., Adams, R. C., & Chambers, C. (2014) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.11.006 · Cited by 204
Robinson, M. J. F., Burghardt, P. R., Patterson, C. M., Nobile, C. W., Akil, H., Watson, S. J., Berridge, K. C., & Ferrario, C. R. (2015) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2015.71 · Cited by 189
Self-citationNeurobiological basis of individual variation in stimulus-reward learning
Flagel, S. B., & Robinson, T. E. (2017) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.12.004 · Cited by 165
Sign Tracking, but Not Goal Tracking, is Resistant to Outcome Devaluation
Morrison, S. E., Bamkole, M. A., & Nicola, S. M. (2015) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2015.00468 · Cited by 137
“It is often thought to be a manifestation of Pavlovian conditioned approach (PCA), and thus driven by the incentive salience that has been attributed to the CS (Berridge, 2004; Anselme et al., 2013; Robinson et al., 2014).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Anselme, P., Robinson, M. J. F., & Berridge, K. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Anselme, Patrick
- Venue
- Behavioural Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-02
- Volume
- 238
- Pages
- 53-61
- ISSN
- 0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4066390
- OpenAlex
- W2111104955
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 4.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Belgian American Educational Foundation
- Educational Foundation of America
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH-63649, R01MH063649)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA015188, DA015188-01-A1)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- reward uncertainty, incentive salience, sign-tracking, goal tracking, classical conditioning, reward probability, reward magnitude, autoshaping, motivation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Attention, Behavior, Animal, Conditioning, Classical, Female, Motivation, Reward, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Uncertainty, Rats
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
