Cited by 410Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Gambling near-misses enhance motivation to gamble and recruit win-related brain circuitry

Open access
Clark, Luke, Lawrence, Andrew J., Astley-Jones, Frances, Gray, Nicola·2009·Neuron

Abstract

"Near-miss" events, where unsuccessful outcomes are proximal to the jackpot, increase gambling propensity and may be associated with the addictiveness of gambling, but little is known about the neurocognitive mechanisms that underlie their potency. Using a simplified slot machine task, we measured behavioral and neural responses to gambling outcomes. Compared to "full-misses," near-misses were experienced as less pleasant, but increased desire to play. This effect was restricted to trials where the subject had personal control over arranging their gamble. Near-miss outcomes recruited striatal and insula circuitry that also responded to monetary wins; in addition, near-miss-related activity in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex varied as a function of personal control. Insula activity to near-misses correlated with self-report ratings as well as a questionnaire measure of gambling propensity. These data indicate that near-misses invigorate gambling through the anomalous recruitment of reward circuitry, despite the objective lack of monetary reinforcement on these trials.

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.neuron.2008.12.031

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clark, L., Lawrence, A. J., Astley-Jones, F., & Gray, N.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Clark, Luke
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-02
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
481-490
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1992824053
Cited by
410
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 19
FWCI
27.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/D000599/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
gambling addiction, personal control, reward systems, striatum, insula, rostral anterior cingulate cortex, gambling motivation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Emotions, Female, Gambling, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Motivation, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Reinforcement, Psychology, 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