“Liking” and “wanting” in eating and food reward: Brain mechanisms and clinical implications
Open accessAbstract
It is becoming clearer how neurobiological mechanisms generate 'liking' and 'wanting' components of food reward. Mesocorticolimbic mechanisms that enhance 'liking' include brain hedonic hotspots, which are specialized subregions that are uniquely able to causally amplify the hedonic impact of palatable tastes. Hedonic hotspots are found in nucleus accumbens medial shell, ventral pallidum, orbitofrontal cortex, insula cortex, and brainstem. In turn, a much larger mesocorticolimbic circuitry generates 'wanting' or incentive motivation to obtain and consume food rewards. Hedonic and motivational circuitry interact together and with hypothalamic homeostatic circuitry, allowing relevant physiological hunger and satiety states to modulate 'liking' and 'wanting' for food rewards. In some conditions such as drug addiction, 'wanting' is known to dramatically detach from 'liking' for the same reward, and this may also occur in over-eating disorders. Via incentive sensitization, 'wanting' selectively becomes higher, especially when triggered by reward cues when encountered in vulnerable states of stress, etc. Emerging evidence suggests that some cases of obesity and binge eating disorders may reflect an incentive-sensitization brain signature of cue hyper-reactivity, causing excessive 'wanting' to eat. Future findings on the neurobiological bases of 'liking' and 'wanting' can continue to improve understanding of both normal food reward and causes of clinical eating disorders.
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.
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?
Motivational responses from food cue reactivity are consciously experienced as food-related cognitions and food cravings and can occur regardless of physiological hunger, leading to increased food-seeking and consumption.
“These motivational responses that arise from reactivity to food cues are consciously experienced as food-related cognitions and food cravings, defined as intense desires or urges to consume food. These responses can manifest regardless of physiological hunger levels and ultimately lead to increased food-seeking and consumption behaviors [30,32].”
From What Is Food Noise? A Conceptual Model of Food Cue Reactivity (2023) · cites this paper as [30]
Humans possess mesocorticolimbic circuitry that is exceptionally efficient at eliciting motivational responses upon exposure to food cues.
“Humans possess an extensive mesocorticolimbic circuitry that is exceptionally efficient at eliciting motivational responses upon exposure to food cues [30,31].”
From What Is Food Noise? A Conceptual Model of Food Cue Reactivity (2023) · cites this paper as [30]
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 432 · Cited by 346
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [110]Smith G, Dopamine and Food Reward, Prog, Psychobiol. Physiol. Psychol 16 (1995) 83– 144. 11539167
- [225]Kuhn BN, Campus P, Flagel SB, The Neurobiological Mechanisms Underlying Sign-Tracking Behavior, in: Tomie A, Morrow J (Eds.), Sign-Tracking Drug Addict., Michigan Publishing, Ann Arbor, MI, n.d.
- [360]Small DM, Zatorre RJ, Dagher A, Evans AC, Jones-Gotman M, Changes in brain activity related to eating chocolate, Brain 124 (2001) 1720– 1733, 10.1093/brain/124.9.1720. 11522575 · DOI · Paper page
- [370]Ahmed SH, Avena NM, Berridge KC, Gearhardt AN, Guillem K, Food Addiction, Pfaff DW, Volkow ND (Eds.), Eds, Springer, New York, NY, 2016, pp. 3771– 3796.
- [418]Toates F, Motivational Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986.
- Authors
- Morales, I., & Berridge, K. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Morales, Ileana
- Venue
- Physiology & Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-12
- Volume
- 227
- Pages
- 113152
- ISSN
- 0031-9384 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7655589
- OpenAlex
- W3080093241
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 432
- Citations by year
- 2026: 64 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 4.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Physiology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DC00011)
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
- National Institutes of Health (MH63649)
- National Institute of Mental Health (DA015188)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- food reward, liking, wanting, incentive motivation, mesocorticolimbic circuitry, ventral pallidum, incentive sensitization, cue reactivity, obesity, binge eating disorder, drug addiction, hunger and satiety, eating disorders
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Food, Food Preferences, Motivation, 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