The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Striatal sensitivity to reward deliveries and omissions in substance dependent patients
Open accessAbstract
Some motivational theories of substance dependence (SD) posit either pathologically increased or decreased ventral striatum (VS) recruitment by cues for nondrug rewards. The incentive-sensitization hypothesis, alternatively, attributes SD to enhanced incentive salience of drug-predictive cues specifically, with no requirement for altered nondrug incentive processing. We assessed whether individuals undergoing inpatient therapy for SD are characterized by altered recruitment of mesolimbic incentive neurocircuitry by cues and deliveries of nondrug rewards. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, substance-dependent patients (SDP) and controls performed a modified monetary incentive delay task featuring: a) anticipatory cues that signaled opportunities to respond to a target to either win money or avoid losing money, b) notifications of wins and losses, and c) unexpected replacement of reward trial outcomes with a demand to repeat the trial. Both anticipatory reward cues and loss cues elicited similar mood responses and VS activation between SDP and controls. However, in SDP (but not controls), reward notifications also activated VS and mesial frontal cortex, and loss notifications activated anterior insula. Finally, substitution of expected outcomes in reward trials with notifications to repeat the trial deactivated the VS in SDP but not in controls. These data do not suggest that SD is characterized by altered recruitment of VS circuitry by cues for nondrug incentives. Rather, SDP may instead have increased limbic system sensitivity to reward and loss delivery, consistent with the role of impulsivity in SD.
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
“A few studies have started to examine these two types of processes separately by separating them temporally, but none have compared adolescents to adults (Bjork et al., 2012; Bjork et al., 2008).”
From A systematic review of fMRI reward paradigms used in studies of adolescents vs. adults: The impact of task design and implications for understanding neurodevelopment (2013) · cites this paper as Bjork et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“The distinction between these two early stages of reward processing (cue appraisal and test preparation, see Figure 2), which has not been explicitly noted in the past (but see Bjork et al., 2012; Bjork et al., 2008), may be quite important, based on the differential relative reliance on striatal function by adolescents and adults across the two stages.”
From A systematic review of fMRI reward paradigms used in studies of adolescents vs. adults: The impact of task design and implications for understanding neurodevelopment (2013) · cites this paper as Bjork et al., 2008
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
AFNI: Software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages
Cox, R. W. (1996) · Computers and Biomedical Research · doi:10.1006/cbmr.1996.0014 · Cited by 10,913
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00064-7 · Cited by 4,123
Psychological Assessment Resources
Abidin, R. R. (1995) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,141
Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards
McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1100907 · Cited by 3,089
Anticipation of Increasing Monetary Reward Selectively Recruits Nucleus Accumbens
Knutson, B., Adams, C. M., Fong, G. W., & Hommer, D. (2001) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.21-16-j0002.2001 · Cited by 2,244
Self-citationDecision making, impulse control and loss of willpower to resist drugs: a neurocognitive perspective
Bechara, A. (2005) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1584 · Cited by 2,149 · cited 1×
“circuitry (Bechara, 2005; Bickel et al., 2007; Newman and Wallace, 1993).”
BackgroundKessler, R. C. (1997) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830160031005 · Cited by 2,085
Kendler, K. S., Prescott, C. A., Myers, J., & Neale, M. C. (2003) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.9.929 · Cited by 1,868
Temporal difference models and reward-related learning in the human brain
O'Doherty, J. P., Dayan, P., Friston, K., Critchley, H., & Dolan, R. J. (2003) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(03)00169-7 · Cited by 1,522
Incentive-sensitization and addiction
Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2001) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.9611038.x · Cited by 1,435
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Function in the human connectome: task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior
Barch, D. M., Burgess, G. C., Harms, M. P., Petersen, S. E., Schlaggar, B. L., Corbetta, M., Glasser, M. F., Curtiss, S., Dixit, S., Feldt, C., et al. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.033 · Cited by 1,529
Self-citationSescousse, G., Caldú, X., Segura, B., & Dreher, J.-C. (2013) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.02.002 · Cited by 782
Ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation correlates with impulsivity in alcoholics
Beck, A., Schlagenhauf, F., Wüstenberg, T., Hein, J., Kienast, T., Kahnt, T., Schmack, K., Hägele, C., Knutson, B., Heinz, A., et al. (2009) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.04.035 · Cited by 461
Luijten, M., Schellekens, A. F., Kühn, S., Machielse, M. W. J., & Sescousse, G. (2017) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3084 · Cited by 402
Oldham, S., Murawski, C., Fornito, A., Youssef, G. J., Yücel, M., & Lorenzetti, V. (2018) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.24184 · Cited by 449
Metadata
- Authors
- Bjork, J. M., Smith, A. R., & Hommer, D. W.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bjork, James M.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1609-1621
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2615386
- OpenAlex
- W2014729506
- Cited by
- 154
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 4.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (Z99 DA999999)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Keywords
- substance dependence, ventral striatum, incentive salience, reward processing, loss aversion, anterior insula, impulsivity, monetary incentive delay task, reward omission
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Alcoholism, Corpus Striatum, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Motivation, Reward, Young Adult
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
