Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 361

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Do we still believe in the dopamine hypothesis? New data bring new evidence

Open access
Abi-Dargham, Anissa·2004·The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Schizophrenia is characterized by positive symptoms, negative symptoms and cognitive impairment. The dopamine hypothesis of schizophrenia postulates that an excess of dopamine subcortically is associated with the positive symptoms. At the same time, the negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia are thought to arise from a deficit of dopamine in the cortex. Evidence for the co-existence of subcortical dopamine excess and cortical dopamine deficit in the schizophrenic brain is presented. Neuroreceptor-imaging techniques, such as SPECT and PET, have been used to provide that evidence. After amphetamine challenge (to stimulate dopamine release), dopamine transmission was substantially increased in the brains of schizophrenic subjects compared with healthy controls. In addition, amphetamine challenge was associated with an increase in positive symptoms of schizophrenia. Furthermore, acute dopamine depletion studies indicated that there was an increased occupancy of D2 receptors by dopamine at baseline in schizophrenia in comparison with healthy controls. This is consistent with the notion of hyperstimulation of D2 receptors in schizophrenia. In the cortex, dopamine type-1 (D1) receptors were found to be up-regulated in patients with schizophrenia compared to controls; in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, a brain region involved in working memory, this increase correlated with a poor performance on the n-back task. The up-regulation of D1 receptors may represent a compensatory effect of the dopamine deficit in the cortex. These findings provide evidence for a corticalsubcortical imbalance in the schizophrenic brain.

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 · 10.1017/s1461145704004110

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 361

Metadata

Authors
Abi-Dargham, A.
Venue
The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2004-03
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
S1-S5
ISSN
  • 1461-1457 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-5111
OpenAlex
W2137924108
Cited by
361
References
3
FWCI
13.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Do we still believe in the dopamine hypothesis? New data bring new evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s1461145704004110
The paper
Abi-Dargham, A. (2004). Do we still believe in the dopamine hypothesis? New data bring new evidence. The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1461145704004110

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.