Cited by 700Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

From prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic computation of reward motivation.

Open access
Berridge, Kent C.·2012·European Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Reward contains separable psychological components of learning, incentive motivation and pleasure. Most computational models have focused only on the learning component of reward, but the motivational component is equally important in reward circuitry, and even more directly controls behavior. Modeling the motivational component requires recognition of additional control factors besides learning. Here I discuss how mesocorticolimbic mechanisms generate the motivation component of incentive salience. Incentive salience takes Pavlovian learning and memory as one input and as an equally important input takes neurobiological state factors (e.g. drug states, appetite states, satiety states) that can vary independently of learning. Neurobiological state changes can produce unlearned fluctuations or even reversals in the ability of a previously learned reward cue to trigger motivation. Such fluctuations in cue-triggered motivation can dramatically depart from all previously learned values about the associated reward outcome. Thus, one consequence of the difference between incentive salience and learning can be to decouple cue-triggered motivation of the moment from previously learned values of how good the associated reward has been in the past. Another consequence can be to produce irrationally strong motivation urges that are not justified by any memories of previous reward values (and without distorting associative predictions of future reward value). Such irrationally strong motivation may be especially problematic in addiction. To understand these phenomena, future models of mesocorticolimbic reward function should address the neurobiological state factors that participate to control generation of incentive salience.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x

Cites

180 of 180 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • All these observations indicate that the role of physiological 'drive states' is really to amplify the incentive value of their relevant incentive targets, and magnify their reward properties, rather than act as independent drives.

    “All these observations indicate that the role of physiological ‘drive states’ is really to amplify the incentive value of their relevant incentive targets, and magnify their reward properties, rather than act as independent drives (Toates, 1986; Berridge, 2012).”

    From Evolving Concepts of Emotion and Motivation (2018) · cites this paper as Berridge, 2012

  • Incentive salience has distinct signature features: often being cue-triggered as a temporary peak of desire to obtain or consume an associated reward.

    “By contrast, incentive salience has distinct signature features: often being cue-triggered as a temporary peak of desire to obtain or consume an associated reward (Berridge, 2001, 2012).”

    From Evolving Concepts of Emotion and Motivation (2018) · cites this paper as Berridge, 2012

  • Reward cues alone are relatively powerless at producing motivation without an appropriate brain state; the brain's reaction to a cue matters for 'wanting' motivation via incentive salience.

    “Reward cues alone are relatively powerless at producing motivation without an appropriate brain state. It’s the brain’s reaction to a cue that matters for ‘wanting’ motivation via incentive salience (Berridge, 2012; Dayan and Berridge, 2014).”

    From Evolving Concepts of Emotion and Motivation (2018) · cites this paper as Berridge, 2012

  • Stress, similar to drugs of abuse, may induce neurological changes that enhance dopaminergic activity and the attribution of incentive value to rewards and their cues.

    “Stress, similar to drugs of abuse, may also induce neurological changes that enhance dopaminergic activity and the attribution of incentive value to rewards and their cues (Berridge, 2012; T. E. Robinson, Angus, & Becker, 1985; Yap et al., 2015).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dickinson A Balleine B Kringelbach ML Berridge KC 2010 Hedonics: The Cognitive-Motivational Interface Pleasures of the brain Oxford University Press Oxford, U.K 74 84
  2. Toates F 1986 Motivational Systems Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Berridge, K. C.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Berridge, Kent C.
Venue
European Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-04
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
1124-1143
ISSN
  • 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-9568
OpenAlex
W2171592792
Cited by
700
References
175
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 90 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 16
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH-63649, R01MH063649)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA017752, DA-017752, DA015188, R01DA015188)
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
incentive salience, reward motivation, mesolimbic system, mesocorticolimbic circuitry, Pavlovian learning, satiety, appetite, addiction, reward prediction error
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Forecasting, Humans, Learning, Limbic System, Models, Neurological, Motivation, Reward

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review