Cited by 2,244Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorGambling Behavior and Treatments

Anticipation of Increasing Monetary Reward Selectively Recruits Nucleus Accumbens

Open access
Knutson, Brian, Adams, Charles M., Fong, Grace W., Hommer, Daniel·2001·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Comparative studies have implicated the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) in the anticipation of incentives, but the relative responsiveness of this neural substrate during anticipation of rewards versus punishments remains unclear. Using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging, we investigated whether the anticipation of increasing monetary rewards and punishments would increase NAcc blood oxygen level-dependent contrast (hereafter, "activation") in eight healthy volunteers. Whereas anticipation of increasing rewards elicited both increasing self-reported happiness and NAcc activation, anticipation of increasing punishment elicited neither. However, anticipation of both rewards and punishments activated a different striatal region (the medial caudate). At the highest reward level ($5.00), NAcc activation was correlated with individual differences in self-reported happiness elicited by the reward cues. These findings suggest that whereas other striatal areas may code for expected incentive magnitude, a region in the NAcc codes for expected positive incentive value.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.21-16-j0002.2001

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • The ventral striatum has been implicated in reward-related processing in humans and animals.

    “The ventral striatum has been implicated in reward-related processing in humans (Knutson, Adams, Fong, & Hommer, 2001; McClure, York, & Montague, 2004) and animals (Elliott, Friston, & Dolan, 2000).”

    From Gender Differences in Emotion Regulation: An fMRI Study of Cognitive Reappraisal (2008) · cites this paper as Knutson, Adams, Fong, & Hommer, 2001

  • Nonclinical human neuroimaging studies indicate that the mesolimbic DA response to primary rewards may operate similarly in humans in response to more abstract, or secondary, rewards such as monetary incentives.

    “Nonclinical human neuroimaging studies indicate that the mesolimbic DA response to primary rewards may operate similarly in humans in response to more abstract, or secondary, rewards such as monetary incentives [98-100].”
  • There are several other measures of impulsive decision-making, including delay aversion tasks or other methods of evaluating discounting of delayed rewards.

    “There are several other measures of impulsive decision-making, including delay aversion tasks or other methods of evaluating discounting of delayed rewards (Bitsakou et al., 2006, Knutson et al., 2001, Muller et al., 2006, Rachlin et al., 1991).”
  • For primary (e.g., food) and secondary (e.g., money) rewards, striatum activity increases when we encounter cues that predict a likely reward and when we obtain a reward outcome.

    “For primary (e.g., food) and secondary (e.g., money) rewards, striatum activity, as measured by blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) fMRI signals, has been observed to increase when we encounter cues that predict a likely reward (e.g., a bell rung before mealtime 12, 13) and when we obtain a reward outcome (e.g., receive and consume the meal 14).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Knutson, B., Adams, C. M., Fong, G. W., & Hommer, D.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2001-08-15
Volume
21
Issue
16
Pages
RC159-RC159
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2119128116
Cited by
2,244
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 73 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 80 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 96 · 2018: 115 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 140 · 2015: 128 · 2014: 147 · 2013: 123 · 2012: 134
FWCI
18.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
Keywords
nucleus accumbens, reward anticipation, monetary rewards, incentive value, striatum, happiness, incentive magnitude, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Caudate Nucleus, Cues, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nucleus Accumbens, Oxygen, Reward, Thalamus, Intuition

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