Cited by 25Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Decision making: effects of methylphenidate on temporal discounting in nonhuman primates

Open access
Rajala, Abigail Z., Jenison, Rick L., Populin, Luis C.·2015·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

Decisions are often made based on which option will result in the largest reward. When given a choice between a smaller but immediate reward and a larger delayed reward, however, humans and animals often choose the smaller, an effect known as temporal discounting. Dopamine (DA) neurotransmission is central to reward processing and encodes delayed reward value. Impulsivity, the tendency to act without forethought, is associated with excessive discounting of rewards, which has been documented in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Both impulsivity and temporal discounting are linked to the dopaminergic system. Methylphenidate (MPH), which blocks the DA transporter and increases extracellular levels of DA in the basal ganglia and prefrontal cortex, is a primary treatment for ADHD and, at low doses, ameliorates impulsivity in both humans and animals. This study tested the hypothesis that low doses of MPH would decrease the discounting rate of rhesus monkeys performing an intertemporal choice task, suggesting a reduction in impulsivity. The results support this hypothesis and provide further evidence for the role of DA in temporal discounting and impulsive behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.00278.2015

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Administration of methylphenidate affected the temporal discounting of rewards.

    “3) showed that administration of methylphenidate affected the temporal discounting of rewards [72].”

    From Linking ADHD to the Neural Circuitry of Attention (2017) · cites this paper as [72]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 82 · Cited by 25

Authors
Rajala, A. Z., Jenison, R. L., & Populin, L. C.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Populin, Luis C.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2015-07
Volume
114
Issue
1
Pages
70-79
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W1816686502
Cited by
25
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • HHS | NIH | National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC003693)
  • NSF (IOB-0517458)
  • NIH (T32GM007507, AA018736)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Keywords
methylphenidate, delay discounting, impulsivity, dopamine, intertemporal choice, rhesus monkeys, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, delayed rewards, dopamine transporter, decision-making
MeSH terms
Animals, Choice Behavior, Impulsive Behavior, Macaca mulatta, Male, Methylphenidate, Neuropsychological Tests, Reward, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Eye Movement Measurements, Delay Discounting

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