Risky decision-making and ventral striatal dopamine responses to amphetamine: A positron emission tomography [11C]raclopride study in healthy adults
Open accessAbstract
Recent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have provided compelling evidence that corticolimbic brain regions are integrally involved in human decision-making. Although much less is known about molecular mechanisms, there is growing evidence that the mesolimbic dopamine (DA) neurotransmitter system may be an important neural substrate. Thus far, direct examination of DA signaling in human risk-taking has centered on gambling disorder. Findings from several positron emission tomography (PET) studies suggest that dysfunctions in mesolimbic DA circuits may play an important role in gambling behavior. Nevertheless, interpretation of these findings is currently hampered by a need for better understanding of how individual differences in regional DA function influence normative decision-making in humans. To further our understanding of these processes, we used [(11)C]raclopride PET to examine associations between ventral striatal (VS) DA responses to amphetamine (AMPH) and risky decision-making in a sample of healthy young adults with no history of psychiatric disorder, Forty-five male and female subjects, ages 18-29 years, completed a computerized version of the Iowa Gambling Task. Participants then underwent two 90-minute PET studies with high specific activity [(11)C]raclopride. The first scan was preceded by intravenous saline; the second, by intravenous AMPH (0.3mg/kg). Findings of primary analyses showed that less advantageous decision-making was associated with greater right VS DA release; the relationship did not differ as a function of gender. No associations were observed between risk-taking and left VS DA release or baseline D2/D3 receptor availability in either hemisphere. Overall, the results support notions that variability in striatal DA function may mediate inter-individual differences in risky decision-making in healthy adults, further suggesting that hypersensitive DA circuits may represent a risk pathway in this population.
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
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 128 · Cited by 45
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Ashburner J Friston KJ Frackowiak RSJ Friston KJ Frith C 2003 Rigid body registration Human Brain Function 2 Academic Press 635 654
- First MB Spitzer RL Gibbon M Williams JBW 2002 Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV-TR axis I disorders, research version, non-patient edition Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute New York
- Linnet J Peterson E Doudet DJ Gjedde A Moller A 2010b Dopamine release in ventral striatum of pathological gamblers losing money Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 122 4 326 333 20712823
- Sobell LC Sobell MB Litten RZ Allen J 1992 Timeline followback: A technique for assessing self-reported alcohol consumption Measuring alcohol consumption: Psychosocial and biological methods Humana Press New Jersey 41 72
- Authors
- Oswald, L. M., Wand, G. S., Wong, D. F., Brown, C. H., Kuwabara, H., & Brašić, J. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Oswald, Lynn M.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 113
- Pages
- 26-36
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4433778
- OpenAlex
- W2053970789
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 128
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 2.32
- 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 (NIH) (R01 DA022433, K05 AA020342, R01 MH078175, M01 RR016500)
- Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) (UL1 TR 001079)
- 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
- risky decision making, ventral striatum, dopamine release, amphetamine challenge, [11C]raclopride, mesolimbic dopamine system, Iowa Gambling Task, individual differences, risk-taking, healthy adults
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Amphetamine, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Decision Making, Dopamine, Female, Gambling, Humans, Individuality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Risk-Taking, Sex Characteristics, Receptors, Dopamine D2, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Raclopride, Positron-Emission Tomography, Receptors, Dopamine D3, Young Adult, Ventral Striatum
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