The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dopaminergic Mechanisms of Individual Differences in Human Effort-Based Decision-Making
Open accessAbstract
Preferences for different combinations of costs and benefits are a key source of variability in economic decision-making. However, the neurochemical basis of individual differences in these preferences is poorly understood. Studies in both animals and humans have demonstrated that direct manipulation of the neurotransmitter dopamine (DA) significantly impacts cost/benefit decision-making, but less is known about how naturally occurring variation in DA systems may relate to individual differences in economic behavior. In the present study, 25 healthy volunteers completed a dual-scan PET imaging protocol with [(18)F]fallypride and d-amphetamine to measure DA responsivity and separately completed the effort expenditure for rewards task, a behavioral measure of cost/benefit decision-making in humans. We found that individual differences in DA function in the left striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex were correlated with a willingness to expend greater effort for larger rewards, particularly when probability of reward receipt was low. Additionally, variability in DA responses in the bilateral insula was negatively correlated with willingness to expend effort for rewards, consistent with evidence implicating this region in the processing of response costs. These findings highlight the role of DA signaling in striatal, prefrontal, and insular regions as key neurochemical mechanisms underlying individual differences in cost/benefit decision-making.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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
“In a PET study of control subjects, Treadway et al (Treadway et al., 2012) showed a positive association between striatal dopamine release (left caudate) and the willingness to expend effort to obtain a larger reward over a smaller reward.”
From Imaging addiction: D2 receptors and dopamine signaling in the striatum as biomarkers for impulsivity (2014) · cites this paper as Treadway et al., 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Longitudinal Data Analysis for Discrete and Continuous Outcomes
Zeger, S. L., & Liang, K. (1986) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531248 · Cited by 7,781
Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information
Maes, F., Collignon, A., Vandermeulen, D., Marchal, G., & Suetens, P. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.563664 · Cited by 4,547
Multi-modal volume registration by maximization of mutual information
Wells, W. M., Viola, P. A., Atsumi, H., Nakajima, S., & Kikinis, R. (1996) · Medical Image Analysis · doi:10.1016/s1361-8415(01)80004-9 · Cited by 1,961
Dopamine-dependent prediction errors underpin reward-seeking behaviour in humans
Pessiglione, M., Seymour, B., Flandin, G., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, C. D. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05051 · Cited by 1,584
Reconsidering anhedonia in depression: Lessons from translational neuroscience
Treadway, M. T., & Zald, D. H. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.06.006 · Cited by 1,579
The Neural Basis of Financial Risk Taking
Kuhnen, C. M., & Knutson, B. (2005) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.08.008 · Cited by 1,182
Neural Predictors of Purchases
Knutson, B., Rick, S., Wimmer, G. E., Prelec, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2007) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2006.11.010 · Cited by 1,171
Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay discounting processes
Bickel, W. K., & Marsch, L. A. (2001) · Addiction · doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.961736.x · Cited by 1,117
Dopamine in drug abuse and addiction: results from imaging studies and treatment implications
Volkow, N. D., Fowler, J. S., Wang, G.-J., & Swanson, J. M. (2004) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001507 · Cited by 1,101
Schultz, W. (2007) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2007.03.007 · Cited by 1,028
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–105 of 105
How Does Behavioural Activation Work? A Systematic Review of the Evidence on Potential Mediators
Janssen, N. P., Hendriks, G.-J., Baranelli, C. T., Lucassen, P., Oude Voshaar, R., Spijker, J., & Huibers, M. J. H. (2021) · Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics · doi:10.1159/000509820 · Cited by 71
Dose-response effects of d-amphetamine on effort-based decision-making and reinforcement learning
Soder, H. E., Cooper, J. A., Lopez-Gamundi, P., Hoots, J. K., Nunez, C., Lawlor, V. M., Lane, S. D., Treadway, M. T., & Wardle, M. C. (2021) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-020-0779-8 · Cited by 61
Self-citationAnderson, B. A., Kuwabara, H., Wong, D. F., Roberts, J., Rahmim, A., Brašić, J. R., & Courtney, S. M. (2017) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.05.062 · Cited by 55
Inpatient suicide in psychiatric settings: Evaluation of current prevention measures
Chammas, F., Januel, D., & Bouaziz, N. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.997974 · Cited by 38
Zhang, X., Wang, X., Dong, D., Sun, X., Zhong, X., Xiong, G., Cheng, C., Lei, H., Chai, Y., Yu, M., et al. (2023) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2022.09.003 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Treadway, M. T., Buckholtz, J. W., Cowan, R. L., Woodward, N. D., Li, R., Ansari, M. S., Baldwin, R. M., Schwartzman, A. N., Kessler, R. M., & Zald, D. H.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2012-05-02
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 6170-6176
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC3391699
- OpenAlex
- W1964544901
- Cited by
- 385
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 12.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Journal of Neuroscience Nursing
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (F31MH087015, R21MH092751)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA019670)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- dopamine, effort-based decision making, individual differences, striatum, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, insula, response cost, reward probability, d-amphetamine, economic decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Brain, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Decision Making, Dopamine, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Reward, Young Adult, Dopaminergic Neurons
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
