Cited by 272Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Neural Hyporesponsiveness and Hyperresponsiveness During Immediate and Delayed Reward Processing in Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Plichta, Michael M., Vasic, Nenad, Wolf, Robert Christian, Lesch, Klaus-Peter, Brummer, Dagmar, Jacob, Christian, Fallgatter, Andreas J., Grön, Georg·2009·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Dysfunctional reward processing, accompanied by a limited ability to tolerate reward delays, has been proposed as an important feature in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Methods Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), brain activation in adult patients with ADHD (n=14) and healthy control subjects (n=12) was examined during a series of choices between two monetary reward options that varied by delay to delivery.Results Compared with healthy control subjects, hyporesponsiveness of the ventral-striatal reward system was replicated in patients with ADHD and was evident for both immediate and delayed rewards. In contrast, delayed rewards evoked hyperactivation in dorsal caudate nucleus and amygdala of ADHD patients. In both structures, neural activity toward delayed rewards was significantly correlated with self-rated ADHD symptom severity.Conclusions The finding of ventral-striatal hyporesponsiveness during immediate and delayed reward processing in patients with ADHD further strengthens the concept of a diminished neural processing of rewards in ADHD. Hyperactivation during delayed reward processing, gradually increasing along the ventral-to-dorsal extension of the caudate nucleus, and especially the concomitant hyperactivation of the amygdala are in accordance with predictions of the delay aversion hypothesis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.07.008

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 62 · Cited by 272

Authors
Plichta, M. M., Vasic, N., Wolf, R. C., Lesch, K.-P., Brummer, D., Jacob, C., Fallgatter, A. J., & Grön, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
Corresponding author
Grön, Georg
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-01
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
7-14
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015402194
Cited by
272
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 24
FWCI
15.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, reward processing, delayed rewards, ventral striatum, caudate nucleus, amygdala, symptom severity
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Basal Ganglia, Brain, Brain Mapping, Caudate Nucleus, Choice Behavior, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Reward

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