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
0 of 39 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn 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)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA 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
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
- 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt 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)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably 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
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt 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.
Inconsistent p-value: F(5,40) = 0.48, p = .72
MinorThe paper reports p = .72 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .789. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.
Reported p = .72 · recomputed p = .789
“F(5,40) = 0.48, P = 0.72”
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
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 998
Striatal Dopamine, Externalizing Proneness, and Substance Abuse
Byrne, K. A., Patrick, C. J., & Worthy, D. A. (2016) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702615618163 · Cited by 20
Liu, Y., Montgomery, S. E., Juarez, B., Morel, C., Zhang, S., Kong, Y., Calipari, E. S., Nestler, E. J., Zhang, L., & Han, M. (2020) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108176 · Cited by 21
“…behaviors are closely associated with VTA dopaminergic neuronal firing patterns and dopamine release in downstream regions such as the NAc (Bass et al., 2013; Calipari et al., 2017; Carelli and Wightman, 2004; Flagel et al., 2011; Salamone et al., 2016; Willuhn et al., 2010; Wook Koo et al., 2016).”
BackgroundKochli, D. E., Keefer, S. E., Gyawali, U., & Calu, D. J. (2020) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2020.593645 · Cited by 15
“…BLA–NAc core communication in driving cocaine seeking (Di Ciano and Everitt, 2004), and NAc is heavily implicated in both sign-tracking and the enhanced cocaine relapse observed in ST rats (Flagel et al., 2011; Chang et al., 2012; Clark et al., 2013; Saunders et al., 2013; Fraser and Janak, 2017).”
BackgroundEsumi, S., Sagara, H., Nakamoto, A., Kawasaki, Y., Gomita, Y., & Sendo, T. (2012) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2012.10.051 · Cited by 19
Wickham, R. J., Solecki, W., Nunes, E. J., & Addy, N. (2015) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.06.021 · Cited by 21
The influence of rewards on incidental memory: more does not mean betterPreprint
Cheng, S., Jiang, T., Xue, J., Wang, S., Chen, C., & Zhang, M. (2020) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.051722.120 · Cited by 19
Fitzpatrick, C. J., Creeden, J. F., Perrine, S. A., & Morrow, J. D. (2016) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.22619 · Cited by 18
Paradoxical accentuation of motivation following accumbens-pallidum disconnection
Chang, S. E., Todd, T. P., & Smith, K. S. (2018) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2018.02.001 · Cited by 18
“as well as in cue attraction reflected in sign-tracking (Flagel et al., 2011; Chang et al., 2015; Ahrens et al., 2016; Chow, Nickell, Darna, & Beckmann, 2016).”
BackgroundBadiani, A., Caprioli, D., & Pirro, S. D. (2019) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-019-05318-9 · Cited by 20
“…notion that dopamine encodes either a prediction error signal or the incentive salience properties of drug-paired cues (e.g., Schultz et al. 1993; Montague et al. 1996; Berridge 2007; Flagel et al. 2011; for a broader discussion of the role of dopamine in learning and motivation see Berke 2018).”
Advances in studying phasic dopamine signaling in brain reward mechanisms
Addy, N. A. (2013) · Frontiers in Bioscience-Elite · doi:10.2741/e678 · Cited by 20
Impairment of Synaptic Plasticity by Cannabis, Δ9-THC, and Synthetic CannabinoidsPreprint
Hoffman, A. F., Hwang, E.-K., & Lupica, C. R. (2020) · Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a039743 · Cited by 21
A Cocaine-Activated Ensemble Exerts Increased Control Over Behavior While Decreasing in Size
Thibeault, K. C., Leonard, M. Z., Kondev, V., Emerson, S. D., Bethi, R., López, A. J., Sens, J. P., Nabit, B. P., Elam, H. B., Winder, D. G., et al. (2024) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2024.06.008 · Cited by 18
Shedding Light on the Role of Ventral Tegmental Area Dopamine in Reward
Saunders, B. T., & Richard, J. M. (2011) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4924-11.2011 · Cited by 17
Sayette, M. A., & Dimoff, J. D. (2016) · Psychology of Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1037/adb0000177 · Cited by 21
Orbitofrontal participation in sign- and goal-tracking conditioned responses: Effects of nicotine
Stringfield, S. J., Palmatier, M. I., Boettiger, C. A., & Robinson, D. L. (2016) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2016.12.020 · Cited by 17
“The OFC is part of a much broader circuit that stimulates the sign-tracking response, particularly in terms of mesocorticolimbic circuitry that includes the nucleus accumbens (Cooch et al., 2015) and is required for the attribution of incentive salience to a cue (Flagel et al., 2011b).”
InfluentialSiciliano, C. A., McIntosh, J. M., Jones, S. R., & Ferris, M. J. (2017) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2017.06.028 · Cited by 21
Nasser, H. M., Lafferty, D. S., Lesser, E. N., Bacharach, S. Z., & Calu, D. J. (2017) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2017.11.010 · Cited by 17
“…effects for both food cup and lever approach behaviors suggests other brain circuits support these behaviors in the absence of BLA-IC communication (Flagel et al., 2011; Ahrens, Meyer, Ferguson, Robinson, & Aldridge, 2016; Chang, Todd, Bucci, & Smith, 2015; Clark, Collins, Sanford, & Phillips…”
BackgroundRice, O. V., Ashby, C. R., Dixon, C., Laurenzo, W., Hayden, J., Song, R., Li, J., Tiwari, A. K., & Gardner, E. L. (2018) · Synapse · doi:10.1002/syn.22035 · Cited by 17
Decreases in Cued Reward Seeking After Reward-Paired Inhibition of Mesolimbic Dopamine
Fischbach-Weiss, S., & Janak, P. H. (2019) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2019.04.035 · Cited by 18
“There are many examples of neural response profiles consistent with this view (Cohen et al., 2012; Day et al., 2007; Eshel et al., 2015; Flagel et al., 2011; Hart et al., 2014; Ljungberg et al., 1992; Matsumoto and Hikosaka, 2009; Owesson-White et al., 2008; Roesch et al., 2007; Saunders et al., 2018; Schultz et al.,…”
BackgroundStelly, C. E., Girven, K. S., Lefner, M. J., Fonzi, K. M., & Wanat, M. J. (2021) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-020-00941-z · Cited by 15
“Dopamine is thought to mediate distinct functions in the NAc core and NAc shell, with NAc core dopamine primarily involved with reward learning and NAc shell dopamine regulating learned behavioral actions [10, 12, 16, 23].”
BackgroundTraining for Variable and Innovative Behavior
Pryor, K. W., & Chase, S. (2014) · International Journal of Comparative Psychology · doi:10.46867/ijcp.2014.27.02.01 · Cited by 17
Independent circuits in basal ganglia and cortex for the processing of reward and precision feedback
Pascucci, D., Hickey, C., Jovicich, J., & Turatto, M. (2017) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.067 · Cited by 19
Smith, A. P., Hofford, R. S., Zentall, T. R., & Beckmann, J. S. (2018) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-018-4851-6 · Cited by 16
Hawkins, R. D. (2013) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.031237.113 · Cited by 17
Schettino, M., Ceccarelli, I., Tarvainen, M. P., Martelli, M., Orsini, C., & Ottaviani, C. (2022) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-022-01014-y · Cited by 20
Chitre, A. S., Hebda‐Bauer, E. K., Blandino, P., Bimschleger, H. V., Nguyen, K., Maras, P. M., Li, F., Ozel, A. B., Pan, Y., Polesskaya, O., et al. (2023) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2022.1003074 · Cited by 17
“bHRs and bLRs also respond very differently to environmental stimuli associated with reward during a Pavlovian conditioned approach (PavCA) task; a cue associated with reward becomes a reinforcer by itself for the bHRs (“signtracking”), while a cue serves only as a predictor of reward for bLRs (“goal-tracking”) (Flage…”
BackgroundSelf-citationSuri, D., Zanni, G., Mahadevia, D., Chuhma, N., Saha, R., Spivack, S., Pini, N., Stevens, G. S., Ziolkowski-Blake, A., Simpson, E. H., et al. (2023) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-023-02194-w · Cited by 17
“In contrast, we fi nd no effects of P32-41 DAT blockade on baseline locomotor activity, motivation, working memory, and reversal-learning — behaviors known to be modulated and controlled by DAergic activity.”
ResultPerez-Sepulveda, J. A., Flagel, S. B., García-Fuster, M. J., Slusky, R. J., Aldridge, J. W., Watson, S. J., & Akil, H. (2013) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.06.015 · Cited by 16
“In this context, bHR animals show a strong drive for novelty exploration, have a higher sensitivity to DA agonists and an elevated dopaminergic response to rewardrelated cues (Flagel et al., 2010, 2011).”
InfluentialSelf-citationFante, C., Eldar‐Boock, A., Satchi‐Fainaro, R., Osborn, H. M. I., & Greco, F. (2011) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm200382r · Cited by 16
Park, J., Bhimani, R. V., & Bass, C. E. (2018) · Journal of The Electrochemical Society · doi:10.1149/2.0091812jes · Cited by 17
A proposed role for glucocorticoids in mediating dopamine-dependent cue-reward learning
Lopez, S. A., & Flagel, S. B. (2020) · Stress · doi:10.1080/10253890.2020.1768240 · Cited by 16
Self-citationDopaminergic signaling supports auditory social learning
Paraouty, N., Rizzuto, C. R., & Sanes, D. H. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-92524-1 · Cited by 17
Li, W., Jin, J., Xiong, T., Yu, P., & Mao, L. (2022) · Angewandte Chemie · doi:10.1002/ange.202204134 · Cited by 17
Implantable (Bio)sensors as new tools for wireless monitoring of brain neurochemistry in real time
Farina, D. (2014) · World Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.5497/wjp.v3.i1.1 · Cited by 16
Stimulus Novelty Energizes Actions in the Absence of Explicit Reward
Koster, R., Seow, T. X. F., Dolan, R. J., & Düzel, E. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159120 · Cited by 15
Machine-learning-guided design of electroanalytical pulse waveforms
Movassaghi, C. S., Perrotta, K. A., Curry, M. E., Nashner, A. N., Nguyen, K., Wesely, M. E., Alcañiz-Fillol, M., Liu, C., Meyer, A. S., & Andrews, A. M. (2025) · Digital Discovery · doi:10.1039/d5dd00005j · Cited by 15
Drug Abuse Amongst Adolescent Learners in Townships
Sedibe, M., & Hendricks, N. G. P. (2020) · Interchange · doi:10.1007/s10780-020-09407-z · Cited by 18
Roughley, S., Marcus, A., & Killcross, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2021.740992 · Cited by 14
Pearce, A. L., Fuchs, B. A., & Keller, K. (2022) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2022.1021868 · Cited by 21
“Sign-trackers show greater phasic dopaminergic (DA) signaling in ventral striatum, a region integral in stimulus-reward learning, which has been linked to the attribution of incentive salience to the CS (21, 22, 26, 28, 29).”
BackgroundBlockade of dopamine D3 receptor in ventral tegmental area attenuating contextual fear memory
Ding, X., Yang, M., Wu, N., Li, J., & Song, R. (2022) · Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2022.114179 · Cited by 14
Higher-order conditioning: A critical review and computational model.
Honey, R. C., & Dwyer, D. M. (2022) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000368 · Cited by 19
The effect of reward on motor learning: different stage, different effect
Zhao, J., Zhang, G., & Xu, D. (2024) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1381935 · Cited by 16
Forderhase, A. G., Ligons, L. A., Norwood, E., McCarty, G. S., & Sombers, L. A. (2024) · ACS Sensors · doi:10.1021/acssensors.4c00527 · Cited by 16
Smith, A. R., Garris, P. A., & Casto, J. M. (2015) · Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy · doi:10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.04.002 · Cited by 15
Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement
Lloyd, D. R., Kausch, M. A., Gancarz, A. M., Beyley, L. J., & Richards, J. B. (2012) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2012.07.012 · Cited by 15
Katnani, H. A., Patel, S. R., Kwon, C., Abdel-Aziz, S., Gale, J. T., & Eskandar, E. N. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep18806 · Cited by 15
Huys, Q. J. M., Deserno, L., Obermayer, K., Schlagenhauf, F., & Heinz, A. (2016) · Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging · doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2016.06.005 · Cited by 18
Dynamic control of neurochemical release with ultrasonically-sensitive nanoshell-tethered liposomes
Mackay, S. M., Myint, D. M. A., Easingwood, R. A., Hegh, D. Y., Wickens, J. R., Hyland, B. I., Jameson, G. N. L., Reynolds, J. N. J., & Tan, E. W. (2019) · Communications Chemistry · doi:10.1038/s42004-019-0226-0 · Cited by 14
Song, M. R., & Lee, S. W. (2020) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2020.03.005 · Cited by 14
Insulin and endocannabinoids in the mesolimbic system
Sallam, N. A., & Borgland, S. L. (2021) · Journal of Neuroendocrinology · doi:10.1111/jne.12965 · Cited by 15
D2/3Agonist during Learning Potentiates Cued Risky Choice
Mortazavi, L., Hynes, T. J., Chernoff, C. S., Ramaiah, S., Brodie, H. G., Russell, B., Hathaway, B. A., Kaur, S., & Winstanley, C. A. (2023) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1459-22.2022 · Cited by 20
Au, S. L. C., Chen, F.-Y. B., Budgett, D., Malpas, S. C., Guild, S., & McCormick, D. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2019.2936577 · Cited by 16
20 Years of Aberrant Salience in Psychosis: What Have We Learned?
Corlett, P. R., & Fraser, K. M. (2025) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.20240556 · Cited by 22
Differential Associations of Dopamine and Serotonin With Reward and Punishment Processes in Humans
Mkrtchian, A., Qiu, Z., Abir, Y., Erdmann, T., Dercon, Q., Sedlinská, T., Browning, M. D., Costello, H., & Huys, Q. J. M. (2025) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.0839 · Cited by 16
Probing the role of reward expectancy in Pavlovian-instrumental transfer
Ostlund, S. B., & Marshall, A. T. (2021) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.04.021 · Cited by 20
dCA1-NAc shell glutamatergic projection mediates context-induced memory recall of morphine
Liu, Y., Liu, L., Zhu, L., Yang, X., Tong, K., You, Y., Yang, L., Gao, Y., Li, X., Chen, D., et al. (2021) · Pharmacological Research · doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105857 · Cited by 13
Hathaway, B. A., Schumacher, J. D., Hrelja, K. M., & Winstanley, C. A. (2021) · eNeuro · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0341-21.2021 · Cited by 14
Prelimbic cortex neural encoding dynamically tracks expected outcome value
Niedringhaus, M. S., & West, E. A. (2022) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2022.113938 · Cited by 16
Toward neuromarkers for tailored smoking cessation treatments
Versace, F., Robinson, J. D., & Cinciripini, P. M. (2023) · Addiction Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.addicn.2023.100075 · Cited by 12
Electrochemical biosensors for dopamine
Zhu, H., & Xu, G. (2024) · Clinica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.cca.2024.120039 · Cited by 15
Keller, K. L., Vollrath-Smith, F. R., Jafari, M., & Ikemoto, S. (2013) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-013-3300-9 · Cited by 14
Increased sign‐tracking behavior in adolescent rats
DeAngeli, N. E., Miller, S., Meyer, H. C., & Bucci, D. J. (2017) · Developmental Psychobiology · doi:10.1002/dev.21548 · Cited by 17
Marino, R. A., & Levy, R. (2018) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.14208 · Cited by 15
Adolescent Dopamine Neurons Represent Reward Differently during Action and State Guided Learning
McCane, A. M., Wegener, M. A., Faraji, M., Garcia, M. T. R., Wallin-Miller, K., Costa, V. D., & Moghaddam, B. (2021) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1321-21.2021 · Cited by 13
Glutathione in the nucleus accumbens regulates motivation to exert reward-incentivized effort
Zalachoras, I., Ramos‐Fernández, E., Hollis, F., Trovò, L., Rodrigues, J., Strasser, A., Zanoletti, O., Steiner, P., Preitner, N., Xin, L., et al. (2022) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.77791 · Cited by 19
Weismüller, B., Ghio, M., Logmin, K., Hartmann, C. J., Schnitzler, A., Pollok, B., Südmeyer, M., & Bellebaum, C. (2018) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.05.010 · Cited by 14
Activation and measurement of free whisking in the lightly anesthetized rodent
Moore, J. D., Deschênes, M., Kurnikova, A., & Kleinfeld, D. (2014) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2014.119 · Cited by 13
Gileta, A. F., Fitzpatrick, C. J., Chitre, A. S., Pierre, C. L. S., Joyce, E. V., Maguire, R. J., McLeod, A. M., Gonzales, N. M., Williams, A. E., Morrow, J. D., et al. (2018) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/412924 · Cited by 14
Self-citationImpaired Feedback Processing for Symbolic Reward in Individuals with Internet Game Overuse
Kim, J., Kim, H., & Kang, E. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00195 · Cited by 13
“Arch Gen Psychiatry (1993) 50(12):975–90.”
Zhang, X., Tsuboi, D., Funahashi, Y., Yamahashi, Y., Kaibuchi, K., & Nagai, T. (2022) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms231911643 · Cited by 15
“Extracellular dopamine levels increase in the NAc when a reward or reward cue is delivered [17].”
BackgroundDopamine Release in the Nucleus Accumbens Core Encodes the General Excitatory Components of Learning
Taira, M., Millard, S. J., Verghese, A., DiFazio, L. E., Hoang, I. B., Jia, R., Sias, A. C., Wikenheiser, A. M., & Sharpe, M. J. (2024) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0120-24.2024 · Cited by 15
High-anxiety rats are less sensitive to the rewarding affects of amphetamine on 50kHz USV
Lehner, M., Taracha, E., Kaniuga, E., Wisłowska-Stanek, A., Wróbel, J., Sobolewska, A., Turzyńska, D., Skórzewska, A., & Płaźnik, A. (2014) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2014.09.011 · Cited by 13
Toward an interdisciplinary science of consumption
Preston, S. D. (2011) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06163.x · Cited by 13
The effect of a dopamine antagonist on conditioning of sexual arousal in women
Brom, M., Laan, E. T. M., Everaerd, W. T. A. M., Spinhoven, P., Trimbos, B. J. B. M. Z., & Both, S. (2016) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-015-4201-x · Cited by 13
Ahmad, T., & Laviolette, S. R. (2017) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-017-4669-7 · Cited by 13
“VTA dopamine (DA) neurons are major components of the brain’s motivational circuitry and are capable of mediating both reward and aversion-related behavioral processing (Berridge and Robinson 1998; Flagel et al. 2011; Laviolette and van der Kooy 2003, 2004).”
BackgroundScülfort, S. A., Bartsch, D., & Enkel, T. (2016) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2016.07.044 · Cited by 12
Saifullah, A. B., Nagai, T., Kuroda, K., Wulaer, B., Nabeshima, T., Kaibuchi, K., & Yamada, K. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-32840-1 · Cited by 11
Extinction to amphetamine-associated context in female rats is dependent upon conditioned orienting
Hilz, E. N., Lewis, S. M., Park, S., Monfils, M., & Lee, H. J. (2018) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-018-5073-7 · Cited by 12
Roughley, S., & Killcross, S. (2019) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-019-5169-8 · Cited by 12
“…broadly in line with other work that has explored the neurochemical mechanisms underlying sign- and goal-tracking behaviour (Danna and Elmer 2010; Flagel et al. 2011; Holden and Peoples 2010; Lopez et al. 2015), supporting the conclusion that these processes are differentially modulated by…”
InfluentialEvidence for motivational enhancement of sign-tracking behavior under reward uncertainty.
Anselme, P., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Learning and Cognition · doi:10.1037/xan0000213 · Cited by 11
Fuller, J., Burrell, M., Yee, A. G., Liyanagama, K., Lipski, J., Wickens, J. R., & Hyland, B. I. (2019) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2019.101681 · Cited by 13
The role of pedunculopontine nucleus in choice behavior under risk
Leblond, M., Sukharnikova, T., Yu, C., Rossi, M. A., & Yin, H. H. (2014) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.12529 · Cited by 12
Pattern of access determines influence of junk food diet on cue sensitivity and palatability
Kosheleff, A. R., Araki, J., Hsueh, J., Le, A., Quizon, K., Ostlund, S. B., Maidment, N. T., & Murphy, N. P. (2017) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.009 · Cited by 15
Clueless about cues: the impact of reward-paired cues on decision making under uncertainty
Winstanley, C. A., & Hynes, T. J. (2021) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.07.001 · Cited by 15
Bastos, J. M. D. M., Dias, F. R. C., Alves, V. H. N., Carey, R. J., & Carrera, M. P. (2013) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.11.004 · Cited by 13
Savchenko, A. A., Müller, C., Lubec, J., Leo, D., Korz, V., Afjehi-Sadat, L., Maliković, J., Sialana, F. J., Lübec, G., & Sukhanov, I. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.799433 · Cited by 13
“It has been proposed that stimulus–reward associations that produce different CRs are mediated by different neural circuitries (40).”
BackgroundChen, K., Garbusow, M., Sebold, M., Kuitunen‐Paul, S., Smolka, M. N., Huys, Q. J. M., Zimmermann, U. S., Schlagenhauf, F., & Heinz, A. (2022) · Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science · doi:10.1016/j.bpsgos.2022.03.014 · Cited by 11
“Patients had follow-ups 6 months (at weeks 6, 10, 14, 18, 22, and 26) after study participation and retrospectively reported their alcohol consumption since the last follow-up interview using the Timeline Follow-Back (42).”
Shiflett, M. W., Riccie, M., & DiMatteo, R. (2013) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-013-3144-3 · Cited by 12
Batten, S. R., Pomerleau, F., Quintero, J. E., Gerhardt, G. A., & Beckmann, J. S. (2018) · Journal of Neurochemistry · doi:10.1111/jnc.14298 · Cited by 14
Eagle, D. M., Schepisi, C., Chugh, S., Desai, S., Han, S. Y. S., Huang, T., Lee, J. J., Sobala, C., Ye, W., Milton, A. L., et al. (2020) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-020-05636-3 · Cited by 12
Clinton, S. M., Shupe, E. A., Glover, M. E., Unroe, K. A., McCoy, C. R., Cohen, J. L., & Kerman, I. A. (2021) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.15158 · Cited by 15
Self-citationJames, A. S., Pennington, Z. T., Tran, P. V., & Jentsch, J. D. (2015) · eNeuro · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0040-14.2015 · Cited by 11
Dual Reward Prediction Components Yield Pavlovian Sign- and Goal-Tracking
Kaveri, S., & Nakahara, H. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108142 · Cited by 11
Spoelder, M., Hesseling, P., Styles, M., Baars, A. M., Klooster, J. G. L. T., Lesscher, H. M. B., & Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J. (2016) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.13358 · Cited by 14
“…reward-related stimuli is integrated to in fl uence the organization of motor activity (Parkinson et al. , 1999; Ito et al. , 2004; Day et al. , 2007; Ambroggi et al. , 2011; Flagel et al. , 2011; Spoelder et al. , 2015b; West & Carelli, 2016; for reviews see Cardinal et al. , 2002; Floresco, 2015).”
Vousden, G. H., Paulcan, S., Robbins, T. W., Eagle, D. M., & Milton, A. L. (2020) · Learning & Memory · doi:10.1101/lm.050260.119 · Cited by 12
“…behavior including action impulsivity (Lovic et al. 2011; King et al. 2016), increased behavioral disinhibition and greater sensitivity to environmental cues (Flagel et al. 2010), we speculated that sign-trackers may show a reduced ability to control their dysfunctional checking on the ORT.”
BackgroundSelective inhibition of goal-directed actions in the mesencephalic locomotor regionPreprint
Gut, N. K., Yilmaz, D., Kondabolu, K., Huerta-Ocampo, I., & Mena‐Segovia, J. (2022) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2022.01.18.476772 · Cited by 13
Rangel‐Barajas, C., Coronel, I., Zhang, Y., Hernández, M., & Boehm, S. L. (2020) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108339 · Cited by 11
“…transmission in the ventral portion of the striatum or nucleus accumbens (NAc), an integrative region that encodes incentive motivational behavior (Flagel et al., 2011), has been widely associated with addictive patterns including alcohol use disorders (Kapasova and Szumlinski, 2008; Pati et al.,…”
BackgroundAppetitive Needs and Addiction
Sussman, S. Y., & Pakdaman, S. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108632591.004 · Cited by 12
Bacharach, S. Z., Martin, D. A., Stapf, C. A., Sun, F., Li, Y., Cheer, J. F., & Calu, D. J. (2023) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1486-22.2023 · Cited by 11
Dopamine-mediated formation of a memory module in the nucleus accumbens for goal-directed navigation
Jung, K., Krüssel, S., Yoo, S., An, M., Burke, B., Schappaugh, N., Choi, Y., Gu, Z., Blackshaw, S., Costa, R. M., et al. (2024) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-024-01770-9 · Cited by 14
“In contrast, DA release in the NAc core has been shown to be responsive to Pavlovian food-conditioned stimuli and reward-predictive cues 51,54,55 , independent of the hedonic valence of delivered stimuli, and lack habituation after single episodes of stimulus experience 49 .”
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
