The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 39 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
A selective role for dopamine in stimulus-reward learning
Open accessAbstract
Individuals make choices and prioritize goals using complex processes that assign value to rewards and associated stimuli. During Pavlovian learning, previously neutral stimuli that predict rewards can acquire motivational properties, becoming attractive and desirable incentive stimuli. However, whether a cue acts solely as a predictor of reward, or also serves as an incentive stimulus, differs between individuals. Thus, individuals vary in the degree to which cues bias choice and potentially promote maladaptive behaviour. Here we use rats that differ in the incentive motivational properties they attribute to food cues to probe the role of the neurotransmitter dopamine in stimulus–reward learning. We show that intact dopamine transmission is not required for all forms of learning in which reward cues become effective predictors. Rather, dopamine acts selectively in a form of stimulus–reward learning in which incentive salience is assigned to reward cues. In individuals with a propensity for this form of learning, reward cues come to powerfully motivate and control behaviour. This work provides insight into the neurobiology of a form of stimulus–reward learning that confers increased susceptibility to disorders of impulse control.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Dopamine is not required for all forms of stimulus-reward learning; it selectively supports the attribution of incentive salience to reward cues. In rats, sign-trackers show increasing CS-evoked and decreasing US-evoked nucleus accumbens dopamine during Pavlovian conditioning, and dopamine antagonism prevents acquisition of sign-tracking but not goal-tracking conditioned responses.
Key findings
- Systemic flupenthixol attenuated performance of the conditioned response in both bHRs and bLRs, but only bHRs failed to acquire a sign-tracking CR when trained on drug; on drug-free session 8, bHRs still failed to show sign-tracking (P≤0.01 vs saline), whereas bLRs showed a fully developed goal-tracking CR (session 8 vs session 1, P≤0.0002; vs bLR saline, P≥0.6).
- During acquisition, CS-evoked dopamine release increased in bHRs relative to unpaired controls (pairing × session: F(5,35)=4.58, P=0.003) but not bLRs (F(5,35)=0.94, P=0.46); trial-by-trial correlation with trial number was significant for bHR (r²=0.14, P<0.0001) but not bLR (r²=0.003, P=0.54), with different slopes (P=0.005) and higher CS-evoked dopamine in bHRs after acquisition (session six, P=0.04).
- US-evoked dopamine release was lower after acquisition in bHRs (session six, P=0.002), and CS and US signals diverged in bHRs (stimulus × session: F(5,40)=5.47, P=0.0006) but not bLRs (F(5,40)=0.28, P=0.92).
- Outbred rats reproduced the pattern: sign-trackers showed increased CS-evoked and decreased US-evoked dopamine during learning (stimulus × session: F(5,50)=4.43, P=0.002), whereas goal-trackers did not (F(5,40)=0.48, P=0.72); the lever-CS was also a more effective conditioned reinforcer in bHRs than bLRs (phenotype × group interaction for active nose pokes: F(1,33)=4.82, P=0.04).
Methods
- Adult male Sprague-Dawley rats from a selective-breeding colony (bHR/bLR, generations S18–S22) and commercially obtained outbred rats underwent Pavlovian conditioning with a lever-CS paired with food; conditioned responses were classified as sign-tracking (approach lever-CS) or goal-tracking (approach food-tray).
- Fast-scan cyclic voltammetry at carbon-fiber microelectrodes in the nucleus accumbens core measured phasic dopamine (scans every 100 ms, 10 Hz) during conditioning; recording sites were verified histologically.
- Flupenthixol (i.p.) was given for performance (150, 300, or 600 μg/kg before sessions 9, 11, 13, counterbalanced with saline before sessions 8, 10, 12, 14) and for acquisition (225 μg/kg before sessions 1–7); main analyses used ANOVA/ANOVA with session as a continuous variable and correlations.
Limitations
- Stated: the neural mechanisms underlying sign-tracking and goal-tracking behavior remain to be elucidated; the neurochemical data alone do not rule out the possibility that prediction-error signals are present in other dopamine terminal regions.
- Stated: the post-acquisition flupenthixol finding needs cautious interpretation because of a non-specific effect on activity.
- Evident from the text: the causal dopamine manipulation was systemic flupenthixol, and the sample was male rats (selectively bred plus outbred); no female or human data are reported.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
22 Own result · 19 Not checked yet · 19 Own interpretation
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Systemic administration of flupenthixol, a nonspecific dopamine receptor antagonist, attenuated performance of the CR for both bHRs and bLRs.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With training, bHRs came to rapidly approach and engage the lever-CS (Fig. 1a-b)”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This effect was clearly evident when the antagonist was administered during training (Fig. 4, sessions 1–7).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, US-evoked dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens decreased during training in sign-trackers, but not in goal-trackers.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Moreover, in outbred rats where this baseline difference in responding does not exist, we have found similar results, indicating that the lever-CS is a more effective conditioned reinforcer for sign-trackers than goal-trackers13.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Boakes, R. in Operant-Pavlovian Interactions (eds Davis, H. & Hurwitz, H. M. B.) 67–97 (Erlbaum, 1977)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, experiments conducted in commercially-obtained outbred rats reproduced the pattern of dopamine release observed in the selectively-bred rats (Fig. 3, Fig. S4).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We show that intact dopamine transmission is not required for all forms of learning in which reward cues become effective predictors.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: It has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, rats that received non-contiguous (pseudorandom) presentations of the CS and the US did not learn either a sign-tracking or a goal-tracking CR (Fig. 1e).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During four additional sessions, the profound differences in dopamine release between sign- and goal-trackers were stable (Fig. S5), demonstrating that these differences are not limited to the initial stages of learning.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“whereas upon CS presentation bLRs came to rapidly approach and engage the location where food would be delivered (Fig. 1c-d; see detailed statistics in Supplementary Information).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 33
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 4
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both bHRs and bLRs acquired their respective CRs as a function of training, as there was a significant effect of session for all measures of sign-tracking behavior for bHRs (a-b; P≤0.0001), and of goal-tracking behavior for bLRs (c-d; P≤0.0001).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“US-evoked dopamine release also differed between bHR and bLR rats during training (session x phenotype interaction: F(5,40) = 6.09, P = 0.0003), but for this stimulus dopamine release was lower after acquisition in bHRs (session six; P = 0.002; Fig. S4).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the trial-by-trial correlation between CS-evoked dopamine release and trial number was significant for bHR (r2=0.14, P < 0.0001) but not bLR (r2=0.003, P=0.54) rats, producing significantly different slopes (P=0.005) and higher CS-evoked dopamine release in bHR rats after acquisition (Fig. S4, session six; P = 0.04).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the acquisition of conditioned approach, CS-evoked dopamine release (Fig. 2, Fig. S3) increased in bHR rats relative to unpaired controls (pairing x session interaction: F(5,35) = 4.58, P = 0.003), but there was no such effect in bLRs (Fig. 2, Fig. S3; pairing x session interaction: F(5,35) = 0.94, P = 0.46).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Third, bHR rats that underwent Pavlovian training in the presence of a dopamine receptor antagonist did not acquire a sign-tracking CR, consistent with previous reports24; however, dopamine antagonism had no effect on learning a goal-tracking CR in bLR rats.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Clark, J. J. et al. Chronic microsensors for longitudinal, subsecond dopamine detection in behaving animals. Nature Methods 7, 126–129 (2010) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, bHRs and bLRs learned their respective CRs at the same rate, as indicated by analyses of variance in which session was treated as a continuous variable and the phenotypes were directly compared.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The CS and US signals diverge in bHR rats (stimulus x session interaction: F(5,40) = 5.47, P = 0.0006; Fig. 2c) but not bLR rats (stimulus x session interaction: F(5,40) = 0.28, P = 0.92; Fig. 2f).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, there was an increase in CS-evoked and a decrease in US-evoked dopamine release during learning in outbred rats that learned a sign-tracking CR (stimulus x session interaction: F(5,50) = 4.43, P = 0.002; Fig. 3d), but not in those that learned a goal-tracking CR (stimulus x session interaction: F(5,40) = 0.48, P = 0.72; Fig. 3f).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When presentation of a lever-CS was paired with food delivery both bHRs and bLRs developed a Pavlovian CR, but as we have described previously15, the topography of the CR was different in the two groups.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Stead, J. D. et al. Selective breeding for divergence in novelty-seeking traits: heritability and enrichment in spontaneous anxiety-related behaviors. Behav. Genet. 36, 697–712 (2006) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the lever-CS was a more effective conditioned reinforcer in bHR than bLR animals, as indicated by a significant phenotype x group interaction for active nose pokes (F(1,33)=4.82, P=0.04), which controls for “basal” differences in nosepoke responding.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, flupenthixol had no effect on learning the CS-US association that lead to a goal-tracking CR (P≥0.6 vs. saline, session 8; Fig. 4d-f), because on the drug-free session bLRs showed a fully developed goal-tracking CR—their session 8 performance differed significantly from their session 1 performance (P≤0.0002).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both conditioned bHRs and bLRs made more active than inactive nose pokes, and more active nose pokes than control groups that received pseudorandom presentations of the CS and the US (Fig. 1f-g; detailed statistics in Supplementary Information).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the CS evoked dopamine release in both sign- and goal-tracking rats, but this signal increased to a greater degree in sign-trackers, which attributed incentive salience to the CS.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar to surgically naïve animals, bHRs learned a sign-tracking CR (session effect on lever contacts: F(5,20) = 5.76, P = 0.002) and bLRs a goal-tracking CR (session effect on food-receptacle contacts: F(5,20) = 5.18, P = 0.003) during neurochemical data collection (Fig. S2).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was also observed after the rats had already acquired their respective CR (Fig. S6), but this latter finding needs to be interpreted cautiously because of a non-specific effect on activity (Figure S6e).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Outbred rats with similar baseline locomotor activity13 and similar baseline levels of reward-related dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens (see Fig. 3), differ in whether they are prone to learn a sign-tracking or goal-tracking CR, but they still develop patterns of dopamine release specific to that CR.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Boakes, R. in Operant-Pavlovian Interactions (eds Davis, H. & Hurwitz, H. M. B.) 67–97 (Erlbaum, 1977)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, learning a goal-tracking CR does not require intact dopamine transmission, whereas learning a sign-tracking CR does.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: It has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, the lever-CS was equally predictive, evoking a CR in both groups, but it acquired two properties of an incentive stimulus to a greater degree in bHRs than bLRs: it was more attractive, as indicated by approach behavior (Fig. 1a) and more desirable, as indicated by the ability to serve as a conditioned reinforcer (Fig. 1f).”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Phasic neurotransmission in the mesolimbic dopamine system is initially triggered by the receipt of reward (unconditional stimulus; US), but shifts to a cue predictive of reward (conditional stimulus; CS) after associative learning3,4.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Day, J. J., Roitman, M. F., Wightman, R. M. & Carelli, R. M. Associative learning mediates dynamic shifts in dopamine signaling in the nucleus accumbens. Nature Neurosci. 10, 1020–1028 (2007) source
- Not checked yetcites [4] Schultz, W., Dayan, P. & Montague, P. R. A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science 275, 1593–1599 (1997) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, only in sign-trackers is the CS an attractive incentive stimulus, and only in sign-trackers is it strongly desired (i.e. “wanted”), in the sense that animals will work avidly to get it13.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Boakes, R. in Operant-Pavlovian Interactions (eds Davis, H. & Hurwitz, H. M. B.) 67–97 (Erlbaum, 1977)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These behavioral phenotypes are accompanied by baseline differences in dopamine transmission, with bHRs showing elevated sensitivity to dopamine agonists, increased proportion of striatal D2receptors in a high-affinity state, greater frequency of spontaneous dopamine transients15, and higher reward-related dopamine release prior to conditioning, all of which could enhance their attribution of in”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Stead, J. D. et al. Selective breeding for divergence in novelty-seeking traits: heritability and enrichment in spontaneous anxiety-related behaviors. Behav. Genet. 36, 697–712 (2006) source
- Not checked yetcites [29] Wyvell, C. L. & Berridge, K. C. Intra-accumbens amphetamine increases the conditioned incentive salience of sucrose reward: enhancement of reward "wanting" without enhanced "liking" or response reinforcement. J. Neurosci. 20, 8122–8130 (2000) source
- Not checked yetcites [30] Wyvell, C. L. & Berridge, K. C. Incentive sensitization by previous amphetamine exposure: increased cue-triggered "wanting" for sucrose reward. J. Neurosci. 21, 7831–7840 (2001) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, while dopamine may be necessary for the performance of both sign-tracking and goal-tracking CRs, it is only necessary for acquisition of a sign-tracking CR, indicating that these forms of learning are mediated by distinct neural systems.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The selectively-bred rats used in this study have distinctive behavioral phenotypes, including greater behavioral disinhibition and reduced impulse control in bHRs15.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Stead, J. D. et al. Selective breeding for divergence in novelty-seeking traits: heritability and enrichment in spontaneous anxiety-related behaviors. Behav. Genet. 36, 697–712 (2006) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“More importantly, when examined off flupenthixol during the 8th test session, bHRs still failed to demonstrate a sign-tracking CR (P≤0.01 vs. saline, session 8; Fig. 4a-c), indicating that dopamine is necessary for both the performance and the learning of a sign-tracking CR, consistent with previous findings20.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Dalley, J. W. et al. Time-limited modulation of appetitive Pavlovian memory by D1 and NMDA receptors in the nucleus accumbens. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 6189–6194 (2005) source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The core of the nucleus accumbens is an important anatomical substrate for motivated behavior17,18 and has been specifically implicated as a site where dopamine acts to mediate the acquisition and/or performance of Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior19–22.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [17] Berridge, K. C. in Psychology of Learning and Motivation (ed. Medin, D. L.) 223–278 (Academic Press, 2001)
- Not checked yetcites [18] Cardinal, R. N., Parkinson, J. A., Hall, J. & Everitt, B. J. Emotion and motivation: the role of the amygdala, ventral striatum, and prefrontal cortex. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 26, 321–352 (2002) source
- Not checked yetcites [19] Kelley, A. E. Functional specificity of ventral striatal compartments in appetitive behaviors. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 877, 71–90 (1999) source
- Not checked yetcites [20] Dalley, J. W. et al. Time-limited modulation of appetitive Pavlovian memory by D1 and NMDA receptors in the nucleus accumbens. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 6189–6194 (2005) source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Di Ciano, P., Cardinal, R. N., Cowell, R. A., Little, S. J. & Everitt, B. J. Differential involvement of NMDA, AMPA/kainate, and dopamine receptors in the nucleus accumbens core in the acquisition and performance of pavlovian approach behavior. J. Neurosci. 21, 9471–9477 (2001) source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Parkinson, J. A. et al. Nucleus accumbens dopamine depletion impairs both acquisition and performance of appetitive Pavlovian approach behaviour: implications for mesoaccumbens dopamine function. Behav. Brain Res. 137, 149–163 (2002) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In rats selectively-bred for differences in locomotor responses to a novel environment14, high responders to novelty (bHR) consistently learn a sign-tracking CR but low responders to novelty (bLR) consistently learn a goal-tracking CR15.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] Robinson, T. E. & Flagel, S. B. Dissociating the predictive and incentive motivational properties of reward-related cues through the study of individual differences. Biol. Psychiat. 65, 869–873 (2009) source
- Not checked yetcites [15] Stead, J. D. et al. Selective breeding for divergence in novelty-seeking traits: heritability and enrichment in spontaneous anxiety-related behaviors. Behav. Genet. 36, 697–712 (2006) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The CS is an effective predictor in animals that learn either a sign-tracking or a goal-tracking response; it acts as an “excitor”, evoking a CR in both.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Another feature of an incentive stimulus is to be “wanted” and as such animals should work to obtain it10,16.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] Berridge, K. C., Robinson, T. E. & Aldridge, J. W. Dissecting components of reward: 'liking', 'wanting', and learning. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 9, 65–73 (2009) source
- Not checked yetcites [16] Flagel, S. B. et al. An animal model of genetic vulnerability to behavioral disinhibition and responsiveness to reward-related cues: implications for addiction. Neuropsychopharmacology 35, 388–400 (2010) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Collectively, these data provide several lines of evidence demonstrating that dopamine does not act as a universal teaching signal in reward learning, but selectively participates in a form of stimulus-reward learning whereby Pavlovian incentive value is attributed to a CS.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: It has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.
In the paper
“Human motivated behavior is subject to a wide span of individual differences ranging from highly deliberative to highly impulsive actions directed towards the acquisition of rewards32.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Kuo, W. J., Sjostrom, T., Chen, Y. P., Wang, Y. H. & Huang, C. Y. Intuition and deliberation: two systems for strategizing in the brain. Science 324, 519–522 (2009) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The current work demonstrates that dopamine-encoded prediction-error signals are indeed present in the nucleus accumbens of sign-trackers, but not in the accumbens of goal-trackers.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In sum, we show that dopamine is an integral part of reward learning that is specifically associated with the attribution of incentive salience to reward cues.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: It has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous research using site-specific dopamine antagonism20 and dopamine-specific lesions21 indicated that dopamine acts in the nucleus accumbens core to support the learning and performance of sign-tracking behavior.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Dalley, J. W. et al. Time-limited modulation of appetitive Pavlovian memory by D1 and NMDA receptors in the nucleus accumbens. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 6189–6194 (2005) source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Di Ciano, P., Cardinal, R. N., Cowell, R. A., Little, S. J. & Everitt, B. J. Differential involvement of NMDA, AMPA/kainate, and dopamine receptors in the nucleus accumbens core in the acquisition and performance of pavlovian approach behavior. J. Neurosci. 21, 9471–9477 (2001) source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although these neurochemical data alone do not rule out the possibility that prediction-error signals are present in other dopamine terminal regions, the results from systemic dopamine antagonism demonstrate that intact dopamine transmission is generally not required for learning of a goal-tracking CR.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Individuals who attribute reward cues with incentive salience find it more difficult to resist such cues, a feature associated with reduced impulse control15,31.”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Stead, J. D. et al. Selective breeding for divergence in novelty-seeking traits: heritability and enrichment in spontaneous anxiety-related behaviors. Behav. Genet. 36, 697–712 (2006) source
- Not checked yetcites [31] Tomie, A., Aguado, A. S., Pohorecky, L. A. & Benjamin, D. Ethanol induces impulsive-like responding in a delay-of-reward operant choice procedure: impulsivity predicts autoshaping. Psychopharmacology 139, 376–382 (1998) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
It has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.
“To date, it has been difficult to determine whether dopamine mediates the predictive or the motivational properties of reward-associated cues, because these two features are often acquired together.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The neural mechanisms underlying sign-tracking and goal-tracking behavior remain to be elucidated.
“The neural mechanisms underlying sign-tracking and goal-tracking behavior remain to be elucidated.”
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
“These attentional influences are difficult to overcome and may underlie maladaptive reactions in psychiatric disorders, such as the enhanced susceptibility of addicted patients to drug-related cues (Flagel et al., 2011).”
From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Flagel et al., 2011
In the citing paper
“Although not guided by reliability or expected information, this form of attention is a powerful mechanism, which automatically draws resources to stimuli that have intrinsic emotional or conditioned associations (Damaraju et al., 2009; Flagel et al., 2011; Hickey et al., 2010a, b; Hogarth et al., 2010; Libera and Chelazzi, 2009; Vuilleumier, 2005).”
From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Flagel et al., 2011
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“F(5,40) = 0.48, P = 0.72”
§ A selective role for dopamine in reward learning > Abstract
Reported p = .72 · recomputed p = .789
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upF(5, 40) = 0.48reported p = .72 · recomputed p = .789
“F(5,40) = 0.48, p = .72”
- ConsistentF(1, 236) = 3.02reported p = .08 · recomputed p = .084
“F(1,236)=3.02, p = .08”
- ConsistentF(1, 236) = 0.93reported p = .34 · recomputed p = .336
“F(1,236)=0.93, p = .34”
- ConsistentF(1, 33) = 4.82reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .035
“F(1,33)=4.82, p = .04”
- ConsistentF(5, 20) = 5.76reported p = .002 · recomputed p = .002
“F(5,20) = 5.76, p = .002”
- ConsistentF(5, 20) = 5.18reported p = .003 · recomputed p = .003
“F(5,20) = 5.18, p = .003”
- ConsistentF(5, 40) = 10.5reported p < .0001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5,40) = 10.5, p < .0001”
- ConsistentF(1, 8) = 0.13reported p = .73 · recomputed p = .728
“F(1,8) = 0.13, p = .73”
- ConsistentF(5, 40) = 1.16reported p = .35 · recomputed p = .346
“F(5,40) = 1.16, p = .35”
- ConsistentF(5, 35) = 4.58reported p = .003 · recomputed p = .003
“F(5,35) = 4.58, p = .003”
- ConsistentF(5, 35) = 0.94reported p = .46 · recomputed p = .467
“F(5,35) = 0.94, p = .46”
- ConsistentF(5, 40) = 6.09reported p = .0003 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5,40) = 6.09, p = .0003”
- ConsistentF(5, 40) = 5.47reported p = .0006 · recomputed p < .001
“F(5,40) = 5.47, p = .0006”
- ConsistentF(5, 40) = 0.28reported p = .92 · recomputed p = .921
“F(5,40) = 0.28, p = .92”
- ConsistentF(5, 50) = 4.43reported p = .002 · recomputed p = .002
“F(5,50) = 4.43, p = .002”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.
Citations
Cites
The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates
Paxinos, G., & Watson, C. (1983) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-63235-9 · Cited by 28,585
A neural substrate of prediction and reward
Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 · Cited by 9,388 · cited 3×
“The following events were recorded using Med Associates software: (1) the number of lever-CS contacts, (2) the latency to the first lever-CS contact, (3) the number of food-tray entries during lever-CS presentation, and (4) the latency to the first food-tray entry during lever-CS presentation.”
The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction
Robinson, T. (1993) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/0165-0173(93)90013-p · Cited by 7,346
Self-citationThe Psychology of Learning and Motivation
(2021) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(21)x0002-3 · Cited by 5,082
What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience?
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(98)00019-8 · Cited by 4,127
Self-citationLinear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data
Verbeke, G. (1997) · Lecture Notes in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2294-1_3 · Cited by 3,506
Dopamine, learning and motivation.
Wise, R. A. (2004) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1406 · Cited by 3,379 · cited 4×
“08) and (2) the latency to approach the lever-CS for bHR rats versus the”
InfluentialLinear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data
Molenberghs, G., & Verbeke, G. N. (2000) · Springer series in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0300-6 · Cited by 2,681
The debate over dopamine’s role in reward: the case for incentive salience
Berridge, K. C. (2007) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0578-x · Cited by 2,347
Emotion and motivation: the role of the amygdala, ventral striatum, and prefrontal cortex
Cardinal, R. N., Parkinson, J. A., Hall, J., & Everitt, B. J. (2002) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(02)00007-6 · Cited by 2,129
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 998
Neural correlates and determinants of approach–avoidance conflict in the prelimbic prefrontal cortex
Fernández-León, J. A., Engelke, D. S., Aquino-Miranda, G., Goodson, A., Rasheed, M. N., & Monte, F. H. D. (2021) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.74950 · Cited by 39
“…variation in stimulus–reward response depend on differences in dopamine levels in subcortical circuits ( Tomie et al., 2000 ; Flagel et al., 2007 ; Flagel et al., 2011 ), which are regulated by top-down mechanisms involving the mPFC ( Ferenczi et al., 2016 ; Haight et al., 2017 ; Serrano-Barroso…”
Baudonnat, M., Huber, A., David, V., & Walton, M. E. (2013) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2013.00175 · Cited by 43
“…Jeff A. Beeler, The City University of New York, USA Reviewed by: Stan Floresco, University of British Columbia, Canada Saleem Nicola, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA *Correspondence: Mathieu Baudonnat and Mark E. Walton, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, 9…”
BackgroundInfluentialAn automated rat single pellet reaching system with high-speed video capture
Ellens, D. J., Gaidica, M., Toader, A. C., Peng, S., Shue, S., John, T., Bova, A. S., & Leventhal, D. (2016) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.07.009 · Cited by 45
From sign-tracking to attentional bias: Implications for gambling and substance use disorders
Anselme, P., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2020) · Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.109861 · Cited by 48
Segovia, K. N., Correa, M., & Salamone, J. D. (2011) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.07.078 · Cited by 44
Mindfulness-Based Interventions Applied to Addiction Treatments
Kechter, A., & Black, D. S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.040 · Cited by 43
Multiple Memory Systems, Addiction, and Health Habits: New Routes for Translational Science
Stacy, A. W., Pike, J. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.017 · Cited by 43
Neurobiology of Substance Addictions
Christie, N. C., & Bechara, A. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.015 · Cited by 44
Sensitization of Incentive Salience and the Transition to Addiction
Warlow, S. M., Baumgartner, H. M., Freeland, C. M., Naffziger, E. E., Olney, J. J., Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.006 · Cited by 46
Tanning as an Addiction: The State of the Research and Implications for Intervention
Miller, K. A., & Mays, D. M. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.037 · Cited by 43
Schulte, E. M., Schiestl, E. T., & Gearhardt, A. N. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.035 · Cited by 43
The Neurobiology of Mutualistic Behavior: The Cleanerfish Swims into the Spotlight
Soares, M. C. (2017) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00191 · Cited by 43
“In this case, DA signaling is thought to be crucial to the levels in which the incentive elicited by a food-related cue is able to shift individual choices (Flagel et al., 2011a,b).”
BackgroundHeiDI: A model for Pavlovian learning and performance with reciprocal associations.
Honey, R. C., Dwyer, D. M., & Iliescu, A. F. (2020) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000196 · Cited by 46
Behavioral Economics and Addictive Disorders
Jarmolowicz, D. P., & Schneider, T. D. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.005 · Cited by 42
Prevention and Treatment of Compulsive Buying Disorder
Galimov, A., & Black, D. W. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.027 · Cited by 42
Blum, K., Roy, A. K., Podesta, A., Modestino, E. J., Steinberg, B., Gondré-Lewis, M. C., Baron, D. A., Thanos, P. K., Lott, L., Badgaiyan, S., et al. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.031 · Cited by 42
Prevention and Treatment of “Food Addiction”
Davis, C., & Mason, A. E. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.023 · Cited by 42
Human Neurobiological Approaches to Hedonically Motivated Behaviors
Burger, K. S., Shearrer, G. E., & Sadler, J. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.009 · Cited by 42
Feedback Models for Gambling Control: The Use and Efficacy of Online Responsible Gambling Tools
Griffiths, M. D. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.034 · Cited by 42
Dopamine D2 Modulation of Sign and Goal Tracking in Rats
López, J. C., Karlsson, R., & O’Donnell, P. (2015) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2015.68 · Cited by 40
Brain responses to emotional salience and reward in alcohol use disorder
Alba‐Ferrara, L., Müller‐Oehring, E. M., Sullivan, E. V., Pfefferbaum, A., & Schulte, T. (2015) · Brain Imaging and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11682-015-9374-8 · Cited by 43
“Alcohol-related stimuli can then act as predictors of reward and as incentive stimuli motivating and controlling behavior (Flagel et al. 2011).”
BackgroundSinger, B. F., Guptaroy, B., Austin, C. J., Wohl, I., Lovic, V., Seiler, J. L., Vaughan, R. A., Gnegy, M. E., Robinson, T. E., & Aragona, B. J. (2015) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.13134 · Cited by 43
“Previous studies have shown that DA transmission in the NAc core is more important for both the acquisition (Flagel et al., 2011) and performance (Saunders & Robinson, 2012) of ST than GT CRs.”
InfluentialSelf-citationBidirectional Modulation of Substantia Nigra Activity by Motivational State
Rossi, M. A., Fan, D., Barter, J. W., & Yin, H. H. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071598 · Cited by 43
Gottlieb, J. P., Lopes, M. C., & Oudeyer, P. (2016) · Advances in motivation and achievement · doi:10.1108/s0749-742320160000019017 · Cited by 48
Ostlund, S. B., & Maidment, N. (2012) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2011.217 · Cited by 52
Segovia, K. N., Correa, M., Lennington, J. B., Conover, J. C., & Salamone, J. D. (2012) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08036.x · Cited by 40
“…learning that are involved in the shift from FR1 to FR5 responding (Dickinson et al., 1995; Balleine & Dickinson, 1998; Smith-Roe & Kelley, 2000; Baldwin et al., 2002; Cheng et al., 2003; Dalley et al., 2005; Cheng & Feenstra, 2006; Ahn & Phillips, 2007; Flagel et al., 2011; Saddoris et al., 2011).”
Ross, E. K., Kim, J. P., Settell, M. L., Han, S. R., Blaha, C. D., Min, H.-K. P., & Lee, K. H. (2016) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.12.056 · Cited by 45
“…evidence suggests that dopaminergic and glutamatergic synaptic convergence in the NAc provides information that dictates cognitive function involved in memory, learning, attention, and motivation (Berke and Hyman, 2000; Day et al., 2007; Flagel et al., 2011; Kelley, 2004; Pennartz et al., 2011).”
BackgroundBrenes, J. C., & Schwarting, R. K. W. (2015) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.05.012 · Cited by 45
Contributions of nucleus accumbens dopamine to cognitive flexibility
Radke, A. K., Kocharian, A., Covey, D. P., Lovinger, D. M., Cheer, J. F., Mateo, Y., & Holmes, A. (2018) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.14152 · Cited by 44
Sebold, M., Schad, D. J., Nebe, S., Garbusow, M., Jünger, E., Kroemer, N. B., Kathmann, N., Zimmermann, U. S., Smolka, M. N., Rapp, M. A., et al. (2016) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00945 · Cited by 41
Grimm, O., Vollstädt‐Klein, S., Krebs, L., Zink, M., & Smolka, M. N. (2011) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2011.11.027 · Cited by 40
Adams, W. K., Barkus, C., Ferland, J. N., Sharp, T., & Winstanley, C. A. (2017) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-017-4696-4 · Cited by 41
Skirzewski, M., Princz‐Lebel, O., German‐Castelan, L., Crooks, A. M., Kim, K., Tarnow, S. H., Reichelt, A. C., Memar, S., Palmer, D. D., Li, Y., et al. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-35601-x · Cited by 41
Sampling Phasic Dopamine Signaling with Fast‐Scan Cyclic Voltammetry in Awake, Behaving Rats
Fortin, S. M., Cone, J. J., Ng-Evans, S., McCutcheon, J. E., & Roitman, M. F. (2015) · Current Protocols in Neuroscience · doi:10.1002/0471142301.ns0725s70 · Cited by 40
Homeostatic regulation of memory systems and adaptive decisions
Mizumori, S. J. Y., & Jo, Y. S. (2013) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.22176 · Cited by 43
Single-Neuron Responses in the Human Nucleus Accumbens during a Financial Decision-Making Task
Patel, S. R., Sheth, S. A., Mian, M. K., Gale, J. T., Greenberg, B. D., Dougherty, D. D., & Eskandar, E. N. (2012) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0027-12.2012 · Cited by 42
Mouse Models of Neurodevelopmental Disease of the Basal Ganglia and Associated Circuits
Pappas, S. S., Leventhal, D., Albin, R. L., & Dauer, W. T. (2014) · Current topics in developmental biology/Current Topics in Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-397920-9.00001-9 · Cited by 41
Opposite Consequences of Tonic and Phasic Increases in Accumbal Dopamine on Alcohol-Seeking Behavior
Budygin, E. A., Bass, C. E., Grinevich, V. P., Deal, A. L., Bonin, K., & Weiner, J. L. (2020) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2020.100877 · Cited by 41
The Origin of Abnormal Beta Oscillations in the Parkinsonian Corticobasal Ganglia Circuits
Asadi, A., Asl, M. M., Vahabie, A., & Valizadeh, A. (2022) · Parkinson s Disease · doi:10.1155/2022/7524066 · Cited by 44
“However, the classical view of STDP neglects the role of neuromodulators in the learning process during behavioral tasks [97, 98].”
The human female orgasm: critical evaluations of proposed psychological sequelae
Prause, N. (2011) · Sexual & Relationship Therapy · doi:10.1080/14681994.2011.651452 · Cited by 40
Exley, R. A., Clements, M. A., Hartung, H., McIntosh, J. M., Franklin, M., Bermúdez, I., & Cragg, S. J. (2013) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.12298 · Cited by 41
“…governed by ACh acting at striatal nAChRs on DA axon terminals, which ensures that DA release probability is high but, in turn, limits re-release through subsequent short-term depression (Zhou et al., 2001; Rice & Cragg, 2004; Zhang & Sulzer, 2004; Flagel et al., 2011; Threlfell et al., 2012).”
BackgroundRetailleau, A., Déjean, C., Fourneaux, B., Leinekugel, X., & Boraud, T. (2013) · Neurobiology of Disease · doi:10.1016/j.nbd.2013.07.014 · Cited by 42
Smith, S. K., Gosrani, S. P., Lee, C. A., McCarty, G. S., & Sombers, L. A. (2018) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.8b03694 · Cited by 39
Keefer, S. E., Bacharach, S. Z., Kochli, D. E., Chabot, J. M., & Calu, D. J. (2020) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2020.00003 · Cited by 40
“During limited training in PLA cue-evoked striatal dopamine release is evident in ST, but not GT rats, and intra-nucleus accumbens dopamine receptor antagonists reduce sign-, but not goal-tracking behaviors (Flagel et al., 2011; Saunders et al., 2013).”
BackgroundThe impact of caloric availability on eating behavior and ultra-processed food reward
Kelly, A. L., Baugh, M. E., Oster, M. E., & DiFeliceantonio, A. G. (2022) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2022.106274 · Cited by 45
Contemporary approaches to neural circuit manipulation and mapping: focus on reward and addiction
Saunders, B. T., Richard, J. M., & Janak, P. H. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2014.0210 · Cited by 40
GABA, glutamate, dopamine and serotonin transporters expression on memory formation and amnesia
Tellez, R., Gómez-Víquez, L., & Meneses, A. (2011) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2011.12.002 · Cited by 37
Increased consumption of ethanol and sugar water in mice lacking the dopamine D2 long receptor
Bulwa, Z. B., Sharlin, J. A., Clark, P., Bhattacharya, T. K., Kilby, C. N., Wang, Y., & Rhodes, J. S. (2011) · Alcohol · doi:10.1016/j.alcohol.2011.06.004 · Cited by 39
O’Doherty, J. P. (2012) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08074.x · Cited by 37
Examining the role of dopamine D2 and D3 receptors in Pavlovian conditioned approach behaviors
Fraser, K. M., Haight, J. L., Gardner, E. L., & Flagel, S. B. (2016) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.022 · Cited by 37
Self-citationLee, B., Gentry, R. N., Bissonette, G. B., Herman, R. J., Mallon, J. J., Bryden, D. W., Calu, D. J., Schoenbaum, G. M., Coutureau, É., Marchand, A. R., et al. (2018) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2004015 · Cited by 38
“ing that even though there is still a DA response to the US, shortening the ITI reduced the USevoked DA response compared with what has been previously reported [4].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialKlanker, M., Sandberg, T., Joosten, R., Willuhn, I., Feenstra, M., & Denys, D. (2015) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2015.08.011 · Cited by 37
Self-citationA new animal model of placebo analgesia: involvement of the dopaminergic system in reward learning
Lee, I., Lee, B., Park, H., Olausson, H., Enck, P., & Chae, Y. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep17140 · Cited by 42
Meunier, C. J., Roberts, J. G., McCarty, G. S., & Sombers, L. A. (2017) · ACS Chemical Neuroscience · doi:10.1021/acschemneuro.6b00325 · Cited by 38
Adolescent cannabinoid exposure effects on natural reward seeking and learning in rats
Schoch, H., Huerta, M. Y., Ruiz, C. M., Farrell, M. R., Jung, K., Huang, J. J., Campbell, R. R., Piomelli, D., & Mahler, S. V. (2017) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-017-4749-8 · Cited by 36
Servonnet, A., Hernández, G., Hage, C. E., Rompré, P.-P., & Samaha, A. (2020) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2196-19.2020 · Cited by 43
Acute Stress Enhances Associative Learning via Dopamine Signaling in the Ventral Lateral Striatum
Stelly, C. E., Tritley, S. C., Rafati, Y., & Wanat, M. J. (2020) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3003-19.2020 · Cited by 40
Neurociencias, emociones y educación superior: una revisión descriptiva
Tao, H. B., & Botero, C. G. D. P. (2020) · Estudios pedagógicos · doi:10.4067/s0718-07052020000100363 · Cited by 37
Yau, H., Wang, D. V., Tsou, J., Chuang, Y., Chen, B. T., Deisseroth, K. A., Ikemoto, S., & Bonci, A. (2016) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.08.007 · Cited by 39
“Previous studies have indicated that DA signaling is selectively required in learning a sign-tracking but not goal-tracking conditioned responding (Flagel et al., 2011, Saunders and Robinson, 2012).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCherian, A. K., Kucinski, A. J., Pitchers, K. K., Yegla, B., Parikh, V., Kim, Y., Valuskova, P., Gurnani, S. D., Lindsley, C. W., Blakely, R., et al. (2017) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3499-16.2017 · Cited by 36
Amaya, K. A., Stott, J. J., & Smith, K. S. (2020) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.051144.119 · Cited by 35
Toward isolating the role of dopamine in the acquisition of incentive salience attribution
Chow, J. J., Nickell, J. R., Darna, M., & Beckmann, J. S. (2016) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2016.06.028 · Cited by 38
Attention and the Cholinergic System: Relevance to Schizophrenia
Lustig, C., & Sarter, M. F. (2015) · Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · doi:10.1007/7854_2015_5009 · Cited by 34
Parker, J. G., Beutler, L. R., & Palmiter, R. D. (2011) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2411-11.2011 · Cited by 37
DeAngeli, N. E., Todd, T. P., Chang, S. E., Yeh, H. H., Yeh, P. W. L., & Bucci, D. J. (2015) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00451 · Cited by 35
Stimulation of dopamine D 1 receptor improves learning capacity in cooperating cleaner fish
Messias, J. P. M., Santos, T. P., Pinto, M., & Soares, M. C. (2016) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.2272 · Cited by 40
Neural and neurochemical basis of reinforcement-guided decision making
Khani, A., & Rainer, G. (2016) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.01113.2015 · Cited by 38
Accumbal Dopamine Release Tracks the Expectation of Dopamine Neuron-Mediated Reinforcement
Covey, D. P., & Cheer, J. F. (2019) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2019.03.055 · Cited by 36
“…and NAc DA release phasically increase following better than expected events and, as learning proceeds, the DA signal transfers along with action initiation to cues predicting access to the instigating stimulus (Cohen et al., 2012; Day et al., 2007; Flagel et al., 2011; Schultz et al., 1997).”
InfluentialZhang, T., Cheng, X., Jia, S., Li, C., Poo, M., & Xu, B. (2023) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adi2947 · Cited by 40
“However, global modulation of synapses occurs during reward-as-sociated learning via neuromodulators, such as dopamine ( 6 ), noradrenaline ( 7 ), serotonin ( 8 ), and acetylcholine ( 9 ); those act at multiple synapses and derive from dispersed axons of specific neuromodulatory neurons (Fig.”
Neonatal fibroblast growth factor treatment enhances cocaine sensitization
Clinton, S. M., Turner, C. A., Flagel, S. B., Simpson, D. N., Watson, S. J., & Akil, H. (2012) · Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2012.07.006 · Cited by 35
Self-citationDNA Epigenetics in Addiction Susceptibility
Kaplan, G., Xu, H., Abreu, K., & Feng, J. (2022) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2022.806685 · Cited by 34
“Additionally, during reward learning training, reward-predictive cues maintain phasic dopamine release in the NAc of “sign-trackers”, but not “goaltrackers” (Flagel et al., 2011).”
BackgroundCortical dopamine reduces the impact of motivational biases governing automated behaviour
Scholz, V., Hook, R. W., Kandroodi, M. R., Algermissen, J., Ioannidis, K., Christmas, D. M., Valle, S., Robbins, T. W., Grant, J. E., Chamberlain, S. R., et al. (2022) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-022-01291-8 · Cited by 32
“[2, 4, 15–17], based on observations that Pavlovian cues elicit dopamine release in the ventral striatum [18, 19].”
Vanhille, N., Belin‐Rauscent, A., Mar, A. C., Ducret, E., & Belin, D. (2014) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2014.204 · Cited by 33
“Thus despite their drive toward the goal associated with increased dopamine transmission in the accumbens core at the onset of pellet delivery (Flagel et al, 2011), GT rats displayed less interest in consuming saccharin than ST rats which are behaviorally and neuropharmacologically bound to the CSs…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialConditioned stimuli’s role in relapse: preclinical research on Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer
Lamb, R. J., Schindler, C. W., & Pinkston, J. W. (2016) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-016-4216-y · Cited by 33
“The recent work of Flagel et al. (2011) in which they examine the role of dopamine in approach elicited by a food-paired CS provides a nice example.”
BackgroundNeuroscience of resilience and vulnerability for addiction medicine
Morrow, J. D., & Flagel, S. B. (2015) · Progress in brain research · doi:10.1016/bs.pbr.2015.09.004 · Cited by 33
Self-citationCue and Reward Evoked Dopamine Activity Is Necessary for Maintaining Learned Pavlovian Associations
van Zessen, R., Flores-Dourojeanni, J. P., Eekel, T., van den Reijen, S., Lodder, B., Omrani, A., Smidt, M. P., Ramakers, G. M. J., van der Plasse, G., Stuber, G. D., et al. (2021) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2744-20.2021 · Cited by 37
Goedhoop, J. N., van den Boom, B. J. G., Robke, R., Veen, F., Fellinger, L., van Elzelingen, W., Arbab, T., & Willuhn, I. (2022) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.82711 · Cited by 32
Self-citationAnderson, R. I., Bush, P. C., & SPEAR, L. P. (2013) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.09.021 · Cited by 33
Striatal dopamine signals reflect perceived cue–action–outcome associations in mice
Bernklau, T. W., Righetti, B., Mehrke, L. S., & Jacob, S. N. (2024) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01567-2 · Cited by 41
Neurons in the Nucleus Accumbens Promote Selection Bias for Nearer Objects
Morrison, S. E., & Nicola, S. M. (2014) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2197-14.2014 · Cited by 30
“Supporting this notion, both sign tracking (but not goal tracking) (Flagel et al., 2011; Saunders and Robinson, 2012) and NAc cue-evoked excitations (Yun et al., 2004; du Hoffmann and Nicola, 2014) are dependent on the NAc’s dopaminergic input from the VTA.”
BackgroundCerebellar Modulation of Mesolimbic Dopamine Transmission Is Functionally Asymmetrical
Holloway, Z. R., Paige, N. B., Comstock, J. F., Nolen, H. G., Sable, H. J. K., & Lester, D. B. (2019) · The Cerebellum · doi:10.1007/s12311-019-01074-w · Cited by 35
Distinct roles for dopamine clearance mechanisms in regulating behavioral flexibility
Korn, C., Akam, T., Jensen, K. H. R., Vagnoni, C., Huber, A., Tunbridge, E. M., & Walton, M. E. (2021) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-021-01194-y · Cited by 31
Sciascia, J. M., Mendoza, J., & Chaudhri, N. (2013) · Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1111/acer.12262 · Cited by 32
Thorndike's Law 2.0: Dopamine and the Regulation of Thrift
Beeler, J. A. (2012) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2012.00116 · Cited by 40
The hot ‘n’ cold of cue-induced drug relapsePreprint
Pitchers, K. K., Sarter, M. F., & Robinson, T. E. (2018) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.046995.117 · Cited by 36
“sign-tracking but not goal-tracking (Danna and Elmer 2010; Flagel et al. 2011b), and blocking DA neurotransmission in the”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationThe habenula governs the attribution of incentive salience to reward predictive cues
Danna, C. L., Shepard, P. D., & Elmer, G. I. (2013) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00781 · Cited by 35
Sign Tracking and Goal Tracking Are Characterized by Distinct Patterns of Nucleus Accumbens Activity
Gillis, Z. S., & Morrison, S. E. (2019) · eNeuro · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0414-18.2019 · Cited by 35
Rational inattention and tonic dopamine
Mikhael, J. G., Lai, L., & Gershman, S. J. (2021) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008659 · Cited by 34
A Reinforcement Meta-Learning Framework of Executive Function and Information Demand
Silvetti, M., Lasaponara, S., Daddaoua, N., Horan, M., & Gottlieb, J. P. (2021) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2022.10.004 · Cited by 30
Colaizzi, J. M., Flagel, S. B., Gearhardt, A. N., Borowitz, M. A., Kuplicki, R., Zotev, V. S., Clark, G., Coronado, J., Abbott, T., & Paulus, M. P. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-30906-3 · Cited by 45
Self-citationSeparating desire from prediction of outcome value
Berridge, K. C. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.07.007 · Cited by 37
Multiplexing signals in reinforcement learning with internal models and dopamine
Nakahara, H. (2014) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2014.01.001 · Cited by 32
Tanaka, S., O’Doherty, J. P., & Sakagami, M. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11334-2 · Cited by 29
Calipari, E. S., & Jones, S. R. (2014) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2014.02.021 · Cited by 33
The “highs and lows” of the human brain on dopaminergics: Evidence from neuropharmacology
Martins, D., Mehta, M. A., & Prata, D. P. (2017) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.06.003 · Cited by 32
Kuhn, B. N., Klumpner, M. S., Covelo, I. R., Campus, P., & Flagel, S. B. (2017) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-017-4816-1 · Cited by 35
Self-citationSinger, B. F., Bryan, M. A., Popov, P., Scarff, R., Carter, C., Wright, E., Aragona, B. J., & Robinson, T. E. (2016) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.043026.116 · Cited by 30
“This has been hypothesized to reflect the motivational value STs attribute to the CS (Flagel et al. 2011; Robinson et al. 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationvan den Brink, W., & Kiefer, F. (2020) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198713005.003.0050 · Cited by 30
Olshavsky, M. E., Shumake, J., Rosenthal, A. A., Kaddour‐Djebbar, A., Gonzalez-Lima, F., Setlow, B., & Lee, H. J. (2014) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1002/jeab.104 · Cited by 30
Sensory processing: who's in (top‐down) control?
Ruff, C. C. (2013) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.12204 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Flagel, S. B., Clark, J. J., Robinson, T. E., Mayo, L., Czuj, A., Willuhn, I., Akers, C. A., Clinton, S. M., Phillips, P. E. M., & Akil, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Phillips, Paul E. M.
- Akil, Huda
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2010-12-08
- Volume
- 469
- Issue
- 7328
- Pages
- 53-57
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- PMC
- PMC3058375
- OpenAlex
- W2116049552
- Semantic Scholar
- 38476c39379a177d3b95fa22125a1a7f09116670
- Cited by
- 1,026
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 43 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 101 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 84 · 2015: 82 · 2014: 80 · 2013: 85 · 2012: 59
- FWCI
- 24.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (2t32da007278-31)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R00MH085859, R01MH079292)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (F32-DA24540, P01DA021633, T32-DA07278, T32-DA007278, F32DA024540, R37DA004294, R37 DA04294, R01DA027858)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- dopamine, incentive salience, classical conditioning, incentive motivation, food cues, selective breeding, dopamine receptor blockade, cyclic voltammetry, individual differences, impulse control disorders, drug addiction
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Conditioning, Classical, Cues, Dopamine, Flupenthixol, Food, Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders, Learning, Male, Microelectrodes, Models, Neurological, Motivation, Synaptic Transmission, Nucleus Accumbens, Phenotype, Probability, Reward, Signal Transduction, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Dopamine Antagonists, Rats
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
