Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 319

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 228 of the 228 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reward processing and mood-related symptoms: An RDoC and translational neuroscience perspective

Open access
Nusslock, Robin, Alloy, Lauren B.·2017·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background: Two objectives of the NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative are to identify (a) mechanisms that are common to multiple psychiatric disorders, and (b) mechanisms that are unique to specific psychiatric symptoms, and that reflect markers of differential risk for these symptoms. With respect to these objectives, a brain-behavior dimension that has received considerable attention and that is directly relevant to the Positive Valence Systems domain of the RDoC initiative involves reward processing. Methods: The present review paper first examines the relationship between reward processing and mood-related symptoms from an RDoC perspective. We then place this work in a larger context by examining the relationship between reward processing abnormalities and psychiatric symptoms defined broadly, including mood-related symptoms, schizophrenia, and addiction. Results: Our review suggests that reward hyposensitivity relates to a subtype of anhedonia characterized by motivational deficits in unipolar depression, and reward hypersensitivity relates to a cluster of hypo/manic symptoms characterized by excessive approach motivation in the context of bipolar disorder. Integrating this perspective with research on reward processing abnormalities in schizophrenia and addiction, we further argue that the principles of equifinality and multifinality may be preferable to a transdiagnostic perspective for conceptualizing the relationship between reward processing and psychiatric symptoms defined broadly. Conclusion: We propose that vulnerability to either motivational anhedonia or approach-related hypo/manic symptoms involve extreme and opposite profiles of reward processing. We further propose that an equifinality and multifinality perspective may serve as a useful framework for future research on reward processing abnormalities and psychiatric symptoms.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2017.02.001

Cites

228 of 228 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 228 references

Cited by

See all 319

Metadata

Authors
Nusslock, R., & Alloy, L. B.
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
216
Pages
3-16
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2585000431
Cited by
319
References
228
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reward processing and mood-related symptoms: An RDoC and translational neuroscience perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jad.2017.02.001
The paper
Nusslock, R., & Alloy, L. B. (2017). Reward processing and mood-related symptoms: An RDoC and translational neuroscience perspective. Journal of Affective Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.02.001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.