Cited by 299Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

A Neural Computational Model of Incentive Salience

Open access
Zhang, Jun, Berridge, Kent C., Tindell, Amy J., Smith, Kyle S., Aldridge, J. Wayne·2009·PLoS Computational Biology

Abstract

Incentive salience is a motivational property with 'magnet-like' qualities. When attributed to reward-predicting stimuli (cues), incentive salience triggers a pulse of 'wanting' and an individual is pulled toward the cues and reward. A key computational question is how incentive salience is generated during a cue re-encounter, which combines both learning and the state of limbic brain mechanisms. Learning processes, such as temporal-difference models, provide one way for stimuli to acquire cached predictive values of rewards. However, empirical data show that subsequent incentive values are also modulated on the fly by dynamic fluctuation in physiological states, altering cached values in ways requiring additional motivation mechanisms. Dynamic modulation of incentive salience for a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS or cue) occurs during certain states, without necessarily requiring (re)learning about the cue. In some cases, dynamic modulation of cue value occurs during states that are quite novel, never having been experienced before, and even prior to experience of the associated unconditioned reward in the new state. Such cases can include novel drug-induced mesolimbic activation and addictive incentive-sensitization, as well as natural appetite states such as salt appetite. Dynamic enhancement specifically raises the incentive salience of an appropriate CS, without necessarily changing that of other CSs. Here we suggest a new computational model that modulates incentive salience by integrating changing physiological states with prior learning. We support the model with behavioral and neurobiological data from empirical tests that demonstrate dynamic elevations in cue-triggered motivation (involving natural salt appetite, and drug-induced intoxication and sensitization). Our data call for a dynamic model of incentive salience, such as presented here. Computational models can adequately capture fluctuations in cue-triggered 'wanting' only by incorporating modulation of previously learned values by natural appetite and addiction-related states.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000437

Cites

101 of 101 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?

  • These results are consistent with incentive salience theory and highlight a dissociation between the predictive value of a cue, driven by cue learning, and the attribution of cue 'wanting'.

    “These results are consistent with the incentive salience theory, however, and highlight the dissociation that can occur between the predictive value of a cue, driven by cue learning (cue-reward association), and the attribution of cue ‘wanting’ (T. E. Robinson & Flagel, 2009; Zhang, Berridge, Tindell, Smith, & Aldridge, 2009).”
  • The attribution of incentive salience is the product of previous experience (i.e., learned associations) interacting with an individual's genetic propensity and neurobiological state.

    “The attribution of incentive salience is the product of previous experience (i.e., learned associations) interacting with an individual’s genetic propensity and neurobiological state 16,24–27.”

    From A selective role for dopamine in stimulus-reward learning (2011) · cites this paper as [27]

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: 1

  1. [61]Ainslie G 1992 Elster J McPherson MS Picoeconomics Cambridge, U.K. Cambridge University Press 440

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, J., Berridge, K. C., Tindell, A. J., Smith, K. S., & Aldridge, J. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
Berridge, Kent C.
Venue
PLoS Computational Biology
Published
2009-07-17
Volume
5
Issue
7
Pages
e1000437
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W2097552217
Cited by
299
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 17
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PLoS eBooks
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH-63649, R01MH063649)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA017752, DA-017752, DA015188, R01DA015188)
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research
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, computational model, want, physiological state, temporal difference learning, predictive value, addiction, salt appetite, motivation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Appetite, Behavior, Animal, Brain, Conditioning, Classical, Dopamine, Learning, Limbic System, Models, Neurological, Motivation, Reward, 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.

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