The DOI matches its Crossref record; 286 of the 288 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 303 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior
Open accessAbstract
Gambling disorder is an impairing condition confounded by psychiatric co-morbidity, particularly with substance use and anxiety disorders. Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited. The Incentive Sensitization Theory suggests that sensitization of neural “wanting” pathways, which attribute incentive salience to rewards and their cues, is responsible for the excessive desire for drugs and cue-triggered craving. The resulting hyper-reactivity of the “wanting’ system is believed to heavily influence compulsive drug use and relapse. Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse. Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli. Here, we review the literature on how cue attraction and reward uncertainty may underlie gambling pathology, and examine how this framework may advance our understanding of co-mordidity with substance-use disorders (e.g., alcohol, nicotine) and anxiety disorders. We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues. We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which co-mordidity of these disorders may emerge.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review proposes an incentive sensitization/cross-sensitization framework in which reward uncertainty, drugs of abuse, and stress/anxiety each sensitize mesolimbic dopamine “wanting” pathways, helping explain comorbidity among disordered gambling, substance use, and anxiety. It argues that gambling cues and uncertain rewards become motivational magnets that can bidirectionally exacerbate drug use and stress-related pathology.
Key findings
- Gambling disorder is common and impairing: gambling affects nearly 1.8 billion individuals worldwide, 85% of U.S. adults gamble in their lifetime, and average GD prevalence is approximately 2.3%, with subclinical gambling estimated at approximately 12%.
- Comorbidity is high: meta-analytic estimates in subthreshold/clinical gamblers are 28.1% for alcohol use disorders (range 9.9%–73.2%) and 60.1% for nicotine dependence (range 34.9%–76.3%), versus general-population rates of 8.5% and 12.8%, respectively; approximately 37% of subthreshold/clinical gamblers have an anxiety disorder (range 14.0%–60.3%) versus 11.10% 12-month prevalence for any anxiety disorder in the general U.S. population.
- Reward uncertainty is proposed to sensitize dopaminergic systems and enhance incentive salience: uncertain reward cues can become more “wanted” even when they predict reward only 50% of the time, and animal studies show uncertainty exposure increases amphetamine response, amphetamine self-administration, and risky decision-making.
- Cross-sensitization is central: sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling is argued to amplify dopaminergic and motivational responses to the others, with long-lasting neuroadaptations that may explain persistent craving and relapse; treatment outcomes are poor, with only 50% abstinent at 6 months, 29% at 1 year, and 15% at 2 years, and only 8% abstinent after 1 year in Gamblers Anonymous.
Methods
- Narrative literature review synthesizing human and animal studies on incentive sensitization, cue reactivity, reward uncertainty, stress/anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorder.
- The paper integrates evidence across dopaminergic, behavioral, and clinical domains to propose a conceptual cross-sensitization framework for comorbidity.
- No primary data collection, systematic search strategy, or meta-analysis is reported.
Limitations
- The paper states that reported comorbidity prevalence ranges vary considerably due to differences in sample size, diagnostic assessment method, gambling/problem-gambling diagnostic criteria, and geographic location.
- The paper states that little research has examined comorbidity between gambling, substance use, and anxiety/stress-related disorders through this framework, and that further studies are needed to test acute stress effects on dopaminergic responses in gambling disorder and to clarify the direction of the gambling–stress relationship.
- Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without a systematic search or quantitative synthesis, and it relies heavily on animal models and cross-sectional or indirect human evidence for several proposed mechanisms.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
174 Not checked yet · 60 Own interpretation · 28 No basis given · 2 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Similarly, individuals with nicotine or alcohol related substance use disorders are also more likely to meet the diagnostic criteria for GD compared to the general population (Krmpotich et al., 2015; Petry et al., 2005; Rennert et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Krmpotich et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports pathological gambling in 27% of substance-dependent patients in treatment, compared with 3% of the general population. But the Methods specify that study participants had psychostimulant dependence; the paper does not establish this comparison specifically for people with nicotine or alcohol use disorders. Its statement about nicotine and alcohol runs in the opposite direction, reporting higher substance-dependence rates among people with pathological gambling. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked yetcites Petry et al., 2005 source
- Partly supportedcites Rennert et al., 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) says gambling disorder is more prevalent among people with substance use disorders than in the general population and associates alcohol use disorder with greater gambling risk. The paper does not address nicotine-related substance use disorders, so it does not support that part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.87)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In mice, chronic stress during adolescence has also been shown to increase alcohol preference and overall alcohol consumption in adulthood (Chester, Barrenha, Hughes, & Keuneke, 2008; Lopez, Doremus-Fitzwater, & Becker, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Chester, Barrenha, Hughes, & Keuneke, 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods describe 10 consecutive days of footshock exposure, and the Discussion reports increased alcohol intake and preference during the subsequent 30-day drinking period. However, the mice were selectively bred for high alcohol preference (HAP1); the paper cautions that the finding may be specific to them, so it does not establish the claim for mice generally. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites Lopez, Doremus-Fitzwater, & Becker, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that repeated variable stress during adolescence heightened voluntary ethanol intake in adult mice, and the Results report greater intake on several testing days. The Methods list ethanol and water intake as outcomes, but do not report a measure or analysis of alcohol preference, so that part of the claim is not directly supported. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Gambling disorder often co-occurs with psychiatric disorders, particularly substance use and anxiety disorders (el-Guebaly et al., 2006; Kessler et al., 2008; Lorains, Cowlishaw, & Thomas, 2011; Parhami, Mojtabai, Rosenthal, Afifi, & Fong, 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Comorbidity in Gambling Disorder
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The incentive sensitization theory has afforded valuable insight into the neurobiological and behavioral processes that are associated with individual vulnerability to addictive spectrum pathology, such as substance use disorders (T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993) and more recently, gambling disorder (Linnet, 2014; M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b; Rømer Thomsen et al.,”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993 source
- Not checked yetcites Linnet, 2014
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which comorbidity of these disorders may emerge.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high rates of comorbidity between these disorders have provided support on a broad level for an overlap in vulnerability and maintenance factors between anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorders.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Comorbidity in Gambling Disorder
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings not only support that gambling and substance use pathology may have significantly overlapping mechanisms, but also suggest that aspects of repeated gambling or substance use may actively confer risk for one another through biological, behavioral, or environmental pathways.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 32
- It may state two separate claims as one. 57
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, gambling disorder frequently co-occurs with substance use disorders, particularly alcohol and nicotine, as well as mood and anxiety disorders (Conway, Compton, Stinson, & Grant, 2006; B. F. Grant et al., 2004b; Petry et al., 2005; Ronzitti, Kraus, Hoff, & Potenza, 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Introduction
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Substance use disorders are one of the most frequently comorbid conditions in gambling disorder (K.-L. Chou & Afifi, 2011; Lorains et al., 2011; Walther, Morgenstern, & Hanewinkel, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A recent meta-analysis including 11 studies conducted between 1998-2010 reported an average comorbidity rate of 28.1% (range: 9.9% - 73.2%) for alcohol use disorders and 60.1% (range: 34.9% - 76.3%) for nicotine dependence in individuals with subthreshold or clinical gambling severity (Lorains et al., 2011; Petry et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“and approximately 18% of individuals with substance use disorders meet the past 12-month criteria for an anxiety (B. F. Grant et al., 2004b).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In particular, alcohol and nicotine are the most often misused substances among individuals with gambling pathology (Petry et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry et al., 2005 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Approximately 37% (range: 14.0% −60.3%) of subthreshold and clinical gamblers suffer from an anxiety disorder (Kessler et al., 2008; Lorains et al., 2011; Petry et al., 2005)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Though this limitation is important to acknowledge, the evidence suggests that the rates of alcohol and nicotine use disorders in individuals with gambling-related pathology largely exceed those reported in the general population (Alcohol: 8.5%; Nicotine: 12.8%) (Kessler et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kessler et al., 2005 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, models adjusted to account for a breadth of sociodemographic vulnerability factors (i.e., age, race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, marital status, geographic region) have demonstrated that individuals with alcohol use disorders or nicotine dependence are on average at two to three times greater risk for an anxiety disorder in the past 12 months compared to individuals without”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant, Hasin, Chou, Stinson, & Dawson, 2004a
- Not checked yetcites Hasin, Stinson, Ogburn, & Grant, 2007 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In contrast, Grant and colleagues report a 12-month prevalence of 11.10% for any anxiety disorder in the general U.S. population (B. F. Grant et al., 2004b).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“‘Wanting’ and ‘liking’ typically fluctuate in unison, where ‘liking’ a particular reward renders it commensurately ‘wanted’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The incentive sensitization theory (T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993; 2008) was initially proposed to distinguish between the different components of reward.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Often referred to as incentive salience, it is the psychological process by which rewards and the cues associated with them become imbued with subconscious motivational value and are transformed into objects of desire (M. J. F. Robinson, Robinson, & Berridge, 2013; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993; 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“‘Wanting’ represents the visceral motivation and attraction attributed to a reward and reward-related cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together this evidence suggests that dopamine may act as a common neural currency for both gambling and substance use disorder, that may be triggered when exposed to their respective cues, leading to sudden peaks in craving, and ultimately to long-lasting neural changes associated with addiction and relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Collectively, these findings suggest that there may be considerable overlap in the factors that confer risk for gambling, substance use, and anxiety disorders, as well as shared causal mechanisms and maintenance factors that cause these disorders to cohere and bidirectionally exacerbate symptom severity.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It also indicates how the emergence and persistence of these disorders can be related to stress and anxiety.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, following repeated exposure to drugs of abuse, which progressively increases ‘wanting’ and desire for more drug (Vezina, 2004; Vezina, Lorrain, Arnold, Austin, & Suto, 2002), individuals tend to escalate their consumption by increasing both the frequency with which drug is taken and the quantity consumed during each drug-taking episode.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whereas ‘liking’ accounts for the objective hedonic and pleasurable response to rewards, the primary focus is placed on ‘wanting’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It sensitizes the incentive value attributed to drugs, but also particularly to the cues that have been associated with the drug.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While these rewards typically all generate pleasure, a vast body of evidence, in both rodents and humans, suggests that the mesolimbic system is preferentially active during exposure to rewards, with the primary consequence being the release of the neurotransmitter dopamine (Balfour, 2015a; Berridge & Robinson, 1998; Corrigall, Coen, & Adamson, 1994; Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It partitioned reward into ‘liking’, ‘wanting’ and learning, with an important focus on the distinction between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This evidence points to a possible common underlying cause for the coherence of anxiety, gambling and substance use disorders; one where the neuroadaptations associated with a history of stress and trauma might predispose certain individuals to the onset of one or more of these disorders and interact with neurobiological vulnerabilities, resulting in complex comorbid presentations with markedly”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Overlapping biopsychosocial risks factors
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attribution of incentive salience is a psychological process mediated by mesocorticolimbic systems in the brain that help direct behavior towards naturally sought-after rewards, such as food, water and sex.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While in some cases, repeated drug use results in no change in drug ‘liking’, it can also undergo tolerance, where the hedonic response to drug tends to gradually decrease with repeated use.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study examining lifetime trauma history amongst pathological gamblers found that 64% of gamblers reported a history of emotional trauma, 40.5%, physical trauma, and 24.3%, sexual trauma, with the majority of these traumatic events occurring in childhood and a history of trauma being associated with greater frequency of drug and alcohol dependence (Kausch et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Overlapping biopsychosocial risks factors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kausch et al., 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This system is comprised of dopaminergic fibers that project from the ventral tegmental area in the midbrain, to limbic and cortical structures such as the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex (Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although it was long believed that dopamine was the neurotransmitter responsible for pleasure, this has long been disproved, and a large body of evidence suggests that it instead modulates ‘wanting’ (Berridge & Valenstein, 1991; Peciña, Cagniard, Berridge, Aldridge, & Zhuang, 2003; Tindell, Berridge, Zhang, Peciña, & Aldridge, 2005; Wyvell & Berridge, 2000).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In humans, studies show that individuals that abuse cocaine or alcohol show abnormally high dopaminergic activity in the ventral striatum and elevated self-reported craving in response to drug-related cues (Heinz et al., 2014; Miedl, Büchel, & Peters, 2014; Volkow et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly in animals, cue attraction predicts cue-induced reinstatement of nicotine self-administration, while in converse, nicotine administration enhances cue-induced approach behavior (Palmatier, Kellicut, Brianna Sheppard, Brown, & Robinson, 2014; Versaggi, King, & Meyer, 2016), an effect which is disrupted by dopamine antagonists (Palmatier et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Sensitization can also be seen as a greater behavioral response to the drug or enhanced acquisition and escalation of drug self-administration, that accompany brain neural adaptations that underlie amplified ‘wanting’ for the reward (Ferrario et al., 2005; Ferrario & Robinson, 2007; Vezina, 2004; Vezina et al., 2002).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, adolescent nicotine treatment predisposes adult rats to develop increased behavioral sensitivity to chronic nicotine treatment and to be more sensitive to the initial effects of nicotine (Bracken, Chambers, Berg, Rodd, & McBride, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bracken, Chambers, Berg, Rodd, & McBride, 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In fact, Franken and colleagues showed that even after 12 months of treatment individuals recovering from a substance use disorder still displayed heightened cue reactivity, and that exposure to drug cues increased feelings of craving and depression (Franken, de Haan, van der Meer, Haffmans, & Hendriks, 1999).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Franken, de Haan, van der Meer, Haffmans, & Hendriks, 1999
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, in animal studies, sensitization increases neuronal firing in VTA–accumbens–pallidal pathways that code incentive salience as well as the behavioral ability of reward cues to trigger frenzied bursts of effort to obtain the reward (Peciña & Berridge, 2013; Tindell et al., 2005; Wyvell & Berridge, 2001).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In animals, recent findings have shown that repeated alcohol consumption leading to sensitization results in increased dopaminergic reactivity to alcohol (Didone, Masson, Quoilin, Seutin, & Quertemont, 2014), and greater behavioral responsivity (Hoshaw & Lewis, 2001).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Exposure to nicotine also increases its subsequent self-administration, which is further enhanced by nicotine-paired cues (Neugebauer, Cortright, Sampedro, & Vezina, 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Neugebauer, Cortright, Sampedro, & Vezina, 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, drugs such as nicotine produce increases in dopamine transmission but fail to produce any reported ‘liking’ or euphoria in humans, suggesting the absence of any clear relationship between ‘liking’ and the excessive ‘wanting’ that leads to addiction (Balfour, 2015b; Caggiula et al., 2009; Rose, Behm, Westman, & Johnson, 2000).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly in humans, a dissociation has been found between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ for alcohol where small doses of alcohol cause spikes in ‘wanting’ yet leave ‘liking’ unaffected (Hobbs, Remington, & Glautier, 2005; Ostafin, Marlatt, & Troop-Gordon, 2010), and heavy drinkers show higher sensitivity to alcohol’s stimulating and rewarding effects (A. C. King, Hasin, O'Connor, McNamara, & Cao, 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The same is true of alcohol, whereby alcohol-paired cues also trigger cue approach and alcohol-seeking behavior (Krank, 2003; Krank, O'Neill, Squarey, & Jacob, 2008; Srey, Maddux, & Chaudhri, 2015; Tomie & Sharma, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, greater attentional bias to drug-related cues is not only greater in individuals suffering from substance use, but can actually predict rates of relapse after treatment for numerous drugs, including for nicotine (Jane Powell, Dawkins, West, Powell, & Pickering, 2010; Waters et al., 2003) and alcohol (W. M. Cox, Hogan, Kristian, & Race, 2002; W. M. Cox, Pothos, & Hosier, 2007), suggesting”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Gambling environments are robustly full of cues, such as flashing lights and sounds (Griffiths, 1993; Noseworthy & Finlay, 2009; Parke & Griffiths, 2006), and gamblers have been shown to display greater attentional bias and fixate their gaze for longer on gambling-related cues (Hudson, Olatunji, Gough, Yi, & Stewart, 2016; McGrath, Meitner, & Sears, 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that these stimuli also take on increased salience in human gamblers and may possess “motivational magnet” properties”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This finding implies that while gambling-related cues take on increased incentive salience, other non-related or unfamiliar cues may become less important or even inhibit motivation (Leyton, 2007; 2014; Leyton & Vezina, 2012; 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Participants in this study reported that near-misses were significantly less pleasant than full misses, but triggered their urge to play more (L. Clark, Lawrence, Astley-Jones, & Gray, 2009)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L. Clark, Lawrence, Astley-Jones, & Gray, 2009 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is worth mentioning that certain studies instead report a blunted striatal dopamine response to cues in pathological gamblers (Balodis et al., 2012; Miedl, Peters, & Büchel, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Along with evidence that in humans win-associated cues, such as jingles varying in length and size in function of win size, both increase arousal and lead subjects to overestimate their frequency of winning (Dixon et al., 2014)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dixon et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While the majority of animals learn to choose the safe and advantageous options, a small proportion tend to be more risk-preferring, and these risk-preferring animals make more drug-seeking responses and show greater cue-induced incubation of craving after cocaine self-administration (Ferland & Winstanley, 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ferland & Winstanley, 2016 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One of the hallmarks of gambling, and indeed of most games, is the presence of uncertainty (Costikyan, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Costikyan, 2013
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Under reward uncertainty, when the cue only predicts the reward 50% of the time, the predictive value of the cue is degraded, yet these findings suggest that it is more attractive and ‘wanted’ more.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This provides further evidence for the neural and psychological dissociation of ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ and an exacerbation of ‘wanting’ in problem gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“illustrating that although problem gamblers do not enjoy losses, they do find losses highly motivating.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, problem gamblers appear more sensitive to bias attention towards gambling-related cues and to experience craving after exposure to gambling cues than healthy controls (Goudriaan et al., 2014; van Holst et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Goudriaan et al., 2014
- Not checked yetcites van Holst et al., 2012 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, distal cues that are on the periphery of our attention are typically ignored under certain and predictable reward conditions, but when reward conditions are unpredictable, these cues attract more attention (M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2014a).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2014a
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Exposure to reward uncertainty even increases the proportion of individuals that ascribe incentive value to cues, and further narrows their focus on cues (Hellberg et al., 2018; M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hellberg et al., 2018 source
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exposure to acute and chronic stressors often results in initial sensitization of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which may then produce hypersensitivity to other stressors.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sensitization can also affect other physiological systems (i.e. plasma catecholamines, brain monoamines), which appears to be long-lasting, a finding that may explain the long-term consequences of early-life adversity and traumatic stressors (Belda, Fuentes, Daviu, Nadal, & Armario, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Belda, Fuentes, Daviu, Nadal, & Armario, 2015 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This seems notable, given the relationship between anxiety disorders, such as PD, and the strikingly high rates of comorbidity and prospective onset of alcohol and tobacco use disorders among these individuals (Zimmermann et al., 2003; Zvolensky, Bernstein, Marshall, & Feldner, 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Intolerance to uncertainty is a transdiagnostic factor strongly implicated in the maintenance of anxiety disorders, and is associated with greater physiological reactivity, attentional biases, and neural activation to uncertainty and uncertain threat cues (Carleton, 2012; Krain et al., 2006; Mahoney & McEvoy, 2012; Nelson & Shankman, 2011; Simmons, Matthews, Paulus, & Stein, 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In anxiety disorders, such as Panic Disorder (PD) or PTSD, intereoceptive and physiological sensations serve as particularly potent stress cues, and are known to elicit negative affective states, such as anxiety and even panic attacks.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, although there are dopaminergic neurons that encode for just positive or negative motivational events, there are more numerous dopaminergic neurons that excite similarly to both threatening and rewarding events (Matsumoto & Hikosaka, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Matsumoto & Hikosaka, 2009 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In cases of cross-sensitization of ‘wanting’, an individual, as a result of excessively consuming one drug, is rendered hyper-responsive to the motivational effects of other drugs, including ones that may have never been previously consumed.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together these studies demonstrate that repeated exposure to one drug can render individuals more susceptible to the reinforcing effects of another, and highlight the importance played by contextual cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This suggests that both alcohol and nicotine increased the incentive value and propensity to gamble but through separate processes (Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When experienced together, drugs such as nicotine and alcohol, stress and reward uncertainty might exert a cumulative effect on the mesolimbic reward system, a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, in one study, chronically stressed animals displayed a sensitized response to the effects of acute cocaine administration, increased self-administration of cocaine, and demonstrated increased dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens (Holly, Shimamoto, DeBold, & Miczek, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holly, Shimamoto, DeBold, & Miczek, 2012 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their results showed that while administration of alcohol increased cigarette craving and ‘wanting’ to consume more alcohol, it also increased the urge to gamble, whereas nicotine increased average wagers.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It typically leads to compulsive use of their dopaminergic drug medications, with increased reports of drug ‘wanting’ but not drug ‘liking’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Using a similar approach, Mascia and her colleagues found that repeated exposure to uncertainty resulted in self-administration of more amphetamine and a greater dopaminergic response to amphetamine (Mascia et al., 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mascia et al., 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together these results suggest that exposure to reward uncertainty and gambling can increase sensitivity to drugs of abuse which in turn can increase the incentive value associated to gambling and its cues, and possibly promote the transition from casual recreational gambling to compulsive gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Traumatic events or chronic distressed states, typical of anxiety disorders, may therefore leave individuals more susceptible to the rewarding effects of drugs and gambling and predispose individuals to over-attribute value to drugs and gambling cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar findings have also been reported in humans, where adverse childhood experiences were associated with increased likelihood of alcohol use during adolescence and of alcohol abuse as an adult (Dube, Anda, Felitti, Edwards, & Croft, 2002; Dube et al., 2006; Enoch, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crucially, it is frequently accompanied by the development of pathological gambling, hypersexuality, food bingeing and punding (a form of complex behavioral stereotypy), suggesting that incentive sensitization of their dopamine-stimulating medication produces cross-sensitization to several other rewards including gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Some studies have reported sex differences in cross-sensitization, where early life stress enhanced nicotine sensitization in female rats, yet rendered males more sensitive to further stress (McCormick, Robarts, Gleason, & Kelsey, 2004).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McCormick, Robarts, Gleason, & Kelsey, 2004 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, for those who do become sensitized, mesolimbic interactions with corticolimbic circuitry focus excessive desire specifically on that target of addiction, resulting in surges of enhanced ‘wanting’ of the addictive target upon encountering related cues or vivid imagery.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To date, it has been shown in animals that there are genetic differences in the propensity of individual brains to undergo sensitization, and in the functioning of the mesolimbic dopamine system (Dietz, Tapocik, Gaval-Cruz, & Kabbaj, 2005; Phillips, 1997).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies of epidemiology and comorbidity demonstrate a large degree of variation within the disordered gambling population”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together these findings suggest the potential existence of a vicious cycle whereby acute or chronic stress enhances ‘wanting’ for drugs and their cues. This in turn may serve to increase stress through financial, social, and other impairments caused by escalating drug use. In addition, attempts at abstinence may precipitate withdrawal, which can promote further anxiety, resulting in enhanced”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, a recent study examining risky decision-making more broadly, found that cortisol led to a striking increase in risk-taking in men, whereas it had no effect on risk-taking behavior in women (Kluen, Agorastos, Wiedemann, & Schwabe, 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kluen, Agorastos, Wiedemann, & Schwabe, 2017 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sensitization is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by the quantity, timing, and spacing with which a reward or stress is encountered, along with the context in which it is experienced.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“an analysis of various treatment outcomes revealed that 50% of individuals remain abstinent at 6 months post-gambling involvement”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Stinchfield & Winters, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, most animals and likely humans do show some degree of psychomotor sensitization, although few may still reach the levels sufficient to trigger compulsive drug-seeking and taking.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Gamblers Anonymous, the most popular form of intervention”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry & Armentano, 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Of these options, the cognitive and behavioral treatments, which include problem solving, social skills training, and relapse prevention, seem to provide the most promise (Petry & Armentano, 1999).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry & Armentano, 1999 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pervasive sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine system would explain why bouts of craving can occur even years later and why stress remains such a potent trigger of relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“approximately 29% remain abstinent after one year”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Stinchfield & Winters, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“They found that in pathological gamblers, yohimbine produced greater reactivity in the left amygdala and tended to elicit greater subjective stress ratings than in healthy controls (Elman et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Elman et al., 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Knowledge of the mechanisms that cause gambling disorder, substance use, and anxiety disorders to coalesce remains limited.
“Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Little research has examined the comorbidity between gambling, substance use, and anxiety or stress-related disorders through the incentive sensitization framework.
“However, little research has examined the comorbidity that exists between gambling, substance use, and anxiety or stress-related disorders through this framework.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The complex biopsychosocial mechanisms through which childhood adversity and stressful life events confer risk for these disorders remain largely unknown.
“Though this pathway has been highlighted as a potential shared diathesis, the complex biopsychosocial mechanisms through which childhood adversity and stressful life events confer risk for these disorders remain largely unknown.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Neural and biological pathways through which anxiety disorders may actively increase risk for addictive spectrum disorders remain largely unknown.
“However, neural and biological pathways through which anxiety disorders may actively increase risk for addictive spectrum disorders remain largely unknown.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no standard intervention for gambling disorder.
“there is no standard intervention for gambling disorder”
The paper relies on this without support.
Gambling disorder treatments fail to successfully address comorbidity, cultural influences, and socio-demographic differences within the gambling population.
“gambling disorder treatments fail to successfully address comorbidity, cultural influences, and socio-demographic differences within the gambling population”
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
“Individuals with gambling disorder exhibit significantly higher rates of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and PTSD compared to the general population.”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“The sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway, observed in both gambling and substance use disorders, underscores the significant role of stress in relapse [88,89,90].”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“Analysis of data from the National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions, which included 41,869 participants, revealed that those identified as at-risk gamblers and problem gamblers were more likely to have multiple Axis-I and Axis-II disorders than non-gamblers, with this relationship being stronger in low-stress environments.”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
“Various studies support that cue reactivity is heightened amongst individuals with problematic gambling and gambling behavior (Hønsi, Mentzoni, Molde, & Pallesen, 2012; Thalemann, Wölfling, & Grüsser, 2007; Wulfert et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > References
“Thalemann R, Wölfling K, & Grüsser SM (2007). Specific cue reactivity on computer game-related cues in excessive gamers.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
“In particular, problem gamblers appear more sensitive to bias attention towards gambling-related cues and to experience craving after exposure to gambling cues than healthy controls (Goudriaan et al., 2014; van Holst et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > References
“van Holst RJ, Lemmens JS, Valkenburg PM, Peter J, Veltman DJ, & Goudriaan AE (2012). Attentional bias and disinhibition toward gaming cues are related to problem gaming in male adolescents.”
Citations
Cites
Items 201–286 of 286
Hellberg, S. N., Levit, J. D., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2018) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2017.09.036 · Cited by 70 · cited 2×
“Exposure to reward uncertainty even increases the proportion of individuals that ascribe incentive value to cues, and further narrows their focus on cues (Hellberg et al., 2018; M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a).”
Self-citationDopamine, motivation, and the evolutionary significance of gambling-like behaviour
Anselme, P. (2013) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.07.039 · Cited by 69 · cited 2×
“…reward (50% probability) produce a greater dopamine signal, originating from the ventral midbrain, during the anticipation of the uncertain outcome (Anselme, 2013; Fiorillo, Tobler, & Schultz, 2003), and that this dopaminergic signal appears to promote risk-seeking behavior, as evidenced in…”
Increased running response to morphine in morphine-pretreated mice.
Shuster, L., Webster, G. W., & Yu, G. (1975) · The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3565(25)30031-5 · Cited by 68
Evidence for opiate-dopamine cross-sensitization in nucleus accumbens: Studies of conditioned reward
Cunningham, S. T., & Kelley, A. E. (1992) · Brain Research Bulletin · doi:10.1016/0361-9230(92)90137-m · Cited by 65 · cited 2×
“Similarly, a study by Cunningham et al. found that rats who were given intraaccumbens treatment of certain opiates (such as morphine) later proved to be sensitized to the behavioral effects of amphetamine (Cunningham & Kelley, 1992).”
Krank, M. D. (2003) · Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1097/01.alc.0000092060.09228.de · Cited by 65
Ferrario, C. R., & Robinson, T. E. (2007) · European Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2006.08.005 · Cited by 65 · cited 2×
“This increased urge for the drug is due to a sensitization of the neural pathways responsible for Bwanting^ (Ferrario & Robinson, 2007; Ferrario et al., 2005).”
Behavioral sensitization to ethanol in rats: evidence from the Sprague–Dawley strain
Hoshaw, B. A., & Lewis, M. J. (2001) · Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0091-3057(01)00489-0 · Cited by 64 · cited 1×
“In animals, recent findings have shown that repeated alcohol consumption leading to sensitization results in increased dopaminergic reactivity to alcohol (Didone, Masson, Quoilin, Seutin, & Quertemont, 2014), and greater behavioral responsivity (Hoshaw & Lewis, 2001).”
Psychosocial Stress and Its Relationship to Gambling Urges in Individuals with Pathological Gambling
Elman, I., Tschibelu, E., & Borsook, D. (2010) · American Journal on Addictions · doi:10.1111/j.1521-0391.2010.00055.x · Cited by 64
Cortisol boosts risky decision-making behavior in men but not in women
Kluen, L. M., Agorastos, A., Wiedemann, K., & Schwabe, L. (2017) · Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.07.240 · Cited by 64
Cuadra, G., Zurita, A., Lacerra, C., & Molina, V. (1999) · Brain Research Bulletin · doi:10.1016/s0361-9230(98)00179-8 · Cited by 63
Afifi, T. O., Nicholson, R., Martins, S. S., & Sareen, J. (2016) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/0706743715625950 · Cited by 63
Cocaine locomotor activation, sensitization and place preference in six inbred strains of mice
Eisener-Dorman, A. F., Grabowski-Boase, L., & Tarantino, L. M. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Functions · doi:10.1186/1744-9081-7-29 · Cited by 62
Characteristics of Tobacco‐Smoking Problem Gamblers Calling a Gambling Helpline
Potenza, M. N., Steinberg, M. A., McLaughlin, S. D., Wu, R., Rounsaville, B. J., Krishnan‐Sarin, S., George, T. P., & O’Malley, S. S. (2004) · American Journal on Addictions · doi:10.1080/10550490490483044 · Cited by 62 · cited 1×
“…these trends in symptom severity, greater social, financial, and behavioral difficulties have been observed in gamblers who smoke or misuse alcohol, indicating significantly elevated impairments in functioning (McGrath & Barrett, 2009; Moghaddam, Yoon, Campos, & Fong, 2015; Potenza et al., 2004).”
Krmpotich, T., Mikulich-Gilbertson, S., Sakai, J., Thompson, L., Banich, M. T., & Tanabe, J. (2015) · Journal of Addiction Medicine · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000000129 · Cited by 61 · cited 1×
“Similarly, individuals with nicotine- or alcohol-related substance-use disorders are also more likely to meet the diagnostic criteria for GD compared to the general population (Krmpotich et al., 2015; Petry et al., 2005; Rennert et al., 2014).”
Versaggi, C. L., King, C. P., & Meyer, P. J. (2016) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-016-4341-7 · Cited by 60
Role of Stress in Acquisition of Alcohol‐Conditioned Place Preference in Adolescent and Adult Mice
Song, M., Wang, X., Zhao, M., Wang, X., Zhai, H., & Lu, L. (2007) · Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2007.00522.x · Cited by 59
Towards a comprehensive developmental model of pathological gambling
Blanco, C., Hanania, J., Petry, N. M., Wall, M. M., Wang, S., Jin, C. J., & Kendler, K. S. (2015) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.12946 · Cited by 57 · cited 1×
“Anxiety disorders, however, often precede the onset of gambling disorder or substance-use disorders (Blanco et al., 2015; Kausch, Rugle, & Rowland, 2006; Kessler et al., 2008).”
Noseworthy, T. J., & Finlay, K. (2009) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-009-9136-x · Cited by 57 · cited 1×
“Gambling environments are robustly full of cues, such as flashing lights and sounds (Griffiths, 1993; Noseworthy & Finlay, 2009; Parke & Griffiths, 2006), and gamblers have been shown to display greater attentional bias and fixate their gaze for longer on gambling-related cues (Hudson, Olatunji,…”
Kennedy, S. H., Welsh, B. R., Fulton, K. A., Soczynska, J. K., McIntyre, R. S., O’Donovan, C., Milev, R. V., Mellédo, J. L., Bisserbe, J. C., Zimmerman, M. A., et al. (2010) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674371005500905 · Cited by 56 · cited 1×
“For example, depression, bipolar disorder, and personality disorders are also highly co-mordid with gambling and substance-abuse disorders (Bergamini et al., 2018; Edens & Rosenheck, 2011; Kennedy et al., 2010).”
DSM-5 gambling disorder: Prevalence and characteristics in a substance use disorder sample.
Rennert, L., Denis, C., Peer, K., Lynch, K. G., Gelernter, J., & Kranzler, H. R. (2014) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/a0034518 · Cited by 56
Alcohol stress response dampening during imminent versus distal, uncertain threat.
Hefner, K. R., Moberg, C. A., Hachiya, L. Y., & Curtin, J. J. (2013) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033407 · Cited by 56
Yap, J. J., Chartoff, E. H., Holly, E. N., Potter, D. N., Carlezon, W. A., & Miczek, K. A. (2015) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-014-3796-7 · Cited by 55 · cited 1×
“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).”
Tobacco Use and Pathological Gambling
Grant, J. E., & Potenza, M. N. (2005) · Annals of Clinical Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/10401230500295370 · Cited by 55 · cited 1×
“For example, individuals with alcohol- or nicotine-related substance-use disorders often present with more severe gambling behaviors and involvement (Desai & Potenza, 2008; el-Guebaly et al., 2006; J. E. Grant & Potenza, 2005; Ladd & Petry, 2003; Petry & Oncken, 2002).”
Neurobiological underpinnings of reward anticipation and outcome evaluation in gambling disorder
Linnet, J. (2014) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00100 · Cited by 55
Intolerance of uncertainty and insula activation during uncertain reward
Gorka, S. M., Nelson, B. D., Phan, K. L., & Shankman, S. A. (2016) · Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-016-0443-2 · Cited by 55 · cited 1×
“In particular, one human study demonstrated that uncertain rewards, similar to threats, result in increased insula responsivity (Gorka et al., 2016).”
Lack of effect of acute dopamine precursor depletion in nicotine-dependent smokers
Casey, K. F., Benkelfat, C., Young, S. N., & Leyton, M. (2006) · European Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2006.02.002 · Cited by 54
Behavior Genetics of Drug Sensitization
Phillips, T. J. (1997) · Critical Reviews™ in Neurobiology · doi:10.1615/critrevneurobiol.v11.i1.20 · Cited by 54 · cited 1×
“To date, it has been shown in animals that there are genetic differences in the propensity of individual brains to undergo sensitization, and in the functioning of the mesolimbic dopamine system (Dietz, Tapocik, Gaval-Cruz, & Kabbaj, 2005; Phillips, 1997).”
Chester, J. A., Barrenha, G. D., Hughes, M. L., & Keuneke, K. J. (2008) · Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2008.00763.x · Cited by 54
Brielmaier, J., McDonald, C. G., & Smith, R. F. (2012) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2378-1 · Cited by 54
Krank, M. D., O’Neill, S., Squarey, K., & Jacob, J. (2008) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-007-0971-0 · Cited by 53
On Cue: Striatal Ups and Downs in Addictions
Leyton, M., & Vezina, P. (2012) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.04.036 · Cited by 53 · cited 2×
“This finding implies that while gambling-related cues take on increased incentive salience, other non-related or unfamiliar cues may become less important or even inhibit motivation (Leyton, 2007, 2014; Leyton & Vezina, 2012, 2014).”
Cue-specific reactivity in experienced gamblers.
Wulfert, E., Maxson, J., & Jardin, B. (2009) · Psychology of Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1037/a0017134 · Cited by 52 · cited 2×
“Various studies support the notion that cue reactivity is heightened amongst individuals with problematic gambling and gambling behavior (Hønsi, Mentzoni, Molde, & Pallesen, 2012; Thalemann, Wölfling, & Grüsser, 2007; Wulfert et al., 2009).”
Compulsive use of dopaminergic drug therapy in Parkinson's disease: Reward and anti‐reward
Evans, A. H., Lawrence, A. D., Cresswell, S. A., Katzenschlager, R., & Lees, A. J. (2010) · Movement Disorders · doi:10.1002/mds.22898 · Cited by 51
Bradford, D. E., Kaye, J. T., & Curtin, J. J. (2014) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.12193 · Cited by 50
Sex and Adolescent Ethanol Exposure Influence Pavlovian Conditioned Approach
Madayag, A. C., Stringfield, S. J., Reissner, K. J., Boettiger, C. A., & Robinson, D. L. (2017) · Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1111/acer.13354 · Cited by 50
Spoelder, M., Tsutsui, K. T., Lesscher, H. M. B., Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J., & Clark, J. J. (2015) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2015.139 · Cited by 48
Rates and Correlates of Pathological Gambling Among VA Mental Health Service Users
Edens, E. L., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2011) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-011-9239-z · Cited by 48
Dopamine cross-sensitization between psychostimulant drugs and stress in healthy male volunteers
Booij, L., Welfeld, K., Leyton, M., Dagher, A., Boileau, I., Sibon, I., Baker, G. B., Dikšić, M., Soucy, J., Pruessner, J. C., et al. (2016) · Translational Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/tp.2016.6 · Cited by 48 · cited 1×
“Recent human studies have shown that exposure to only three doses of amphetamine can cause cross-sensitization to stress, resulting in an increased cortisol response to stress and greater striatal dopamine release (Booij et al., 2016).”
Pathological gambling recovery in the absence of abstinence
Slutske, W. S., Piasecki, T. M., Blaszczynski, A. P., & Martin, N. G. (2010) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03080.x · Cited by 47
Koot, S., Baars, A., Hesseling, P., van den Bos, R., & Joëls, M. (2013) · Neuropharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2013.02.008 · Cited by 46
Srey, C. S., Maddux, J.-M. N., & Chaudhri, N. (2015) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00054 · Cited by 46
Ostafin, B. D., Marlatt, G. A., & Troop-Gordon, W. (2010) · Psychology of Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1037/a0017897 · Cited by 45
Najavits, L. M., Meyer, T., Johnson, K. M., & Korn, D. (2011) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-010-9230-0 · Cited by 45
Gambling disorder: an integrative review of animal and human studies
Nautiyal, K. M., Okuda, M., Hen, R., & Blanco, C. (2017) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.13356 · Cited by 45
Comfort for uncertainty in pathological gamblers: A fMRI study
Brevers, D., Bechara, A., Hermoye, L., Divano, L., Kornreich, C., Verbanck, P., & Noël, X. (2014) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2014.09.026 · Cited by 41
DIETZ, D., TAPOCIK, J., GAVALCRUZ, M., & KABBAJ, M. (2005) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2005.08.005 · Cited by 41
Gambling Attitudes and Beliefs Predict Attentional Bias in Non-problem Gamblers
Grant, L. D., & Bowling, A. C. (2015) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-014-9468-z · Cited by 40 · cited 1×
“In turn, attentional bias towards gambling cues has been suggested to play a critical role in the transition from recreational to problem gambling (L. D. Grant & Bowling, 2015; van Holst et al., 2012).”
The specificity of attentional biases by type of gambling: An eye-tracking study
McGrath, D. S., Meitner, A., & Sears, C. R. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0190614 · Cited by 40
Baker, L. K., Mao, D., Chi, H., Govind, A. P., Vallejo, Y. F., Iacoviello, M., Herrera, S., Cortright, J. J., Green, W. N., McGehee, D. S., et al. (2013) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.12114 · Cited by 39 · cited 1×
“For nicotine, animal studies have shown that repeated intermittent injections of nicotine typically cause sensitization or enhancement of the drug’s locomotor activating effects (L. K. Baker et al., 2013; Benwell & Balfour, 1992; Clarke & Kumar, 1983; Vezina, McGehee, & Green, 2007).”
Psychological Characteristics of Problem Gamblers with and without Mood Disorder
Lister, J. J., Milosevic, A., & Ledgerwood, D. M. (2015) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674371506000806 · Cited by 39
Using the Threat Probability Task to Assess Anxiety and Fear During Uncertain and Certain Threat
Bradford, D. E., Magruder, K. P., Korhumel, R. A., & Curtin, J. J. (2014) · Journal of Visualized Experiments · doi:10.3791/51905 · Cited by 37
The Role of Mesoaccumbens Dopamine in Nicotine Dependence
Balfour, D. J. K. (2015) · Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-13482-6_3 · Cited by 36
Urge to Gamble in a Simulated Gambling Environment
Kushner, M. G., Thurus, P., Sletten, S., Frye, B., Abrams, K. B., Adson, D. E., Demark, J. V., Maurer, E. W., & Donahue, C. (2007) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-007-9083-3 · Cited by 35 · cited 1×
“For example, individuals playing blackjack in a gambling-like environment reported greater urges to gamble than those in a neutral context (Kushner et al., 2008; McGrath, Dorbeck, & Barrett, 2013).”
Slutske, W. S., Zhu, G., Meier, M. H., & Martin, N. G. (2011) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0022879 · Cited by 33
Yohimbine-Induced Amygdala Activation in Pathological Gamblers: A Pilot Study
Elman, I., Becerra, L., Tschibelu, E., Yamamoto, R., George, E., & Borsook, D. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031118 · Cited by 31 · cited 2×
“They found that in pathological gamblers, yohimbine produced greater reactivity in the left amygdala and tended to elicit greater subjective stress ratings than in healthy controls (Elman et al., 2012).”
Pavlovian Sign-Tracking Model of Alcohol Abuse
Tomie, A., & Sharma, N. (2014) · Current Drug Abuse Reviews · doi:10.2174/18744737113069990023 · Cited by 31
Stress-induced cross-sensitization to amphetamine is related to changes in the dopaminergic system
Cruz, F. C., Marin, M. T., Leão, R. M., & Planeta, C. S. (2012) · Journal of Neural Transmission · doi:10.1007/s00702-011-0720-8 · Cited by 31
Littel, M., Franken, I. H. A., & Van Strien, J. W. (2009) · Neuropsychobiology · doi:10.1159/000205517 · Cited by 31
Cigarette smoking, problem-gambling severity, and health behaviors in high-school students
Weinberger, A. H., Franco, C. A., Hoff, R. A., Pilver, C. E., Steinberg, M. A., Rugle, L. J., Wampler, J., Cavallo, D. A., Krishnan‐Sarin, S., & Potenza, M. N. (2015) · Addictive Behaviors Reports · doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2015.01.001 · Cited by 29 · cited 1×
“…with gambling pathology report significantly higher rates of suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, divorce, arrest, spousal abuse, smoking, and physical health concerns, such as cardiac arrest (Petry & Kiluk, 2002; Petry, Stinson, & Grant, 2005; Potenza et al., 2002; Weinberger et al., 2015).”
What’s deficient in reward deficiency?
Leyton, M. (2014) · Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · doi:10.1503/jpn.140204 · Cited by 28 · cited 1×
“This finding implies that while gambling-related cues take on increased incentive salience, other non-related or unfamiliar cues may become less important or even inhibit motivation (Leyton, 2007, 2014; Leyton & Vezina, 2012, 2014).”
Early life adversity potentiates expression of addiction-related traits
Hynes, T. J., Thomas, C. S., Zumbusch, A. S., Samson, A., Petriman, I., Mrdja, U., Orr, A., Cutts, E., Ruzindana, B. G., Hazari, A., et al. (2017) · Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.09.005 · Cited by 28 · cited 1×
“These results might explain why recent evidence suggests that exposure to early life adversity in rats increases reward and cue Bwanting,^ and potentiates the expression of addiction-related traits in adulthood (Hynes et al., 2017).”
Cortright, J. J., Sampedro, G. R., Neugebauer, N. M., & Vezina, P. (2012) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2012.80 · Cited by 27
The acute effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption on video-lottery terminal gambling
Barrett, S. P., Collins, P., & Stewart, S. H. (2015) · Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2014.12.015 · Cited by 27
Reed, S. C., Haney, M., Evans, S. M., Vadhan, N. P., Rubin, E., & Foltin, R. W. (2009) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.02.004 · Cited by 27
Tschibelu, E., & Elman, I. (2010) · Journal of Addictive Diseases · doi:10.1080/10550887.2010.531671 · Cited by 26
Didone, V., Masson, S., Quoilin, C., Seutin, V., & Quertemont, E. (2016) · Addiction Biology · doi:10.1111/adb.12216 · Cited by 25
Munafó, M. R., Mannie, Z. N., Cowen, P. J., Harmer, C. J., & McTavish, S. B. (2007) · Journal of Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1177/0269881107077216 · Cited by 25
Stress Moderates the Relationships between Problem-Gambling Severity and Specific Psychopathologies
Ronzitti, S., Kraus, S. W., Hoff, R. A., & Potenza, M. N. (2018) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2017.10.028 · Cited by 25
At-risk gambling in patients with severe mental illness: Prevalence and associated features
Bergamini, A., Turrina, C., Bettini, F., Toccagni, A., Valsecchi, P., Sacchetti, E., & Vita, A. (2018) · Journal of Behavioral Addictions · doi:10.1556/2006.7.2018.47 · Cited by 24 · cited 1×
“For example, depression, bipolar disorder, and personality disorders are also highly co-mordid with gambling and substance-abuse disorders (Bergamini et al., 2018; Edens & Rosenheck, 2011; Kennedy et al., 2010).”
Bracken, A. L., Chambers, R. A., Berg, S. A., Rodd, Z. A., & McBride, W. J. (2011) · Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2011.04.008 · Cited by 23
Update on pathological gambling
Grant, J. E., Williams, K. A., & Kim, S. W. (2006) · Current Psychiatry Reports · doi:10.1007/s11920-006-0081-4 · Cited by 22
Uncertainty increases neural indices of attention in obsessive-compulsive disorder
Dieterich, R., Endrass, T., & Kathmann, N. (2017) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1002/da.22655 · Cited by 22
Social and behavioral problems among five gambling severity groups
Moghaddam, J. F., Yoon, G., Campos, M. D., & FONG, T. W. (2015) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2015.07.082 · Cited by 21
Palmatier, M. I., Kellicut, M. R., Brianna Sheppard, A., Brown, R. W., & Robinson, D. L. (2014) · Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2014.08.012 · Cited by 21 · cited 1×
“…of nicotine self-administration, while conversely, nicotine administration enhances cue-induced approach behavior (Palmatier, Kellicut, Brianna Sheppard, Brown, & Robinson, 2014; Versaggi, King, & Meyer, 2016), an effect that is disrupted by dopamine antagonists (Palmatier et al., 2014).”
Giddens, J. L., Stefanovics, E., Pilver, C. E., Desai, R., & Potenza, M. N. (2012) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2012.03.052 · Cited by 20
Biback, C., & Zack, M. (2015) · Current Addiction Reports · doi:10.1007/s40429-015-0064-9 · Cited by 20 · cited 1×
“Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress Similar to drugs of abuse, there is evidence suggesting that stress may render individuals more vulnerable to gambling behavior and associated reward cues (Biback & Zack, 2015).”
Post-traumatic stress symptoms in pathological gambling: Potential evidence of anti-reward processes
Green, C. L., Nahhas, R. W., Scoglio, A. A., & Elman, I. (2017) · Journal of Behavioral Addictions · doi:10.1556/2006.6.2017.006 · Cited by 19 · cited 2×
“…stress symptomatology correlated with greater gambling severity, suggesting a strong relationship between experience of stressful events and gambling problems (C. L. Green et al., 2017) and highlighting enhanced physiological reactivity as a potential contributing factor to this association.”
Kim, W. Y., Cho, B. R., Kwak, M. J., & Kim, J.-H. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-06408-4 · Cited by 19
Eye on the Prize: High-Risk Gamblers Show Sustained Selective Attention to Gambling Cues
Hudson, A., Olatunji, B. O., Gough, K., Yi, S., & Stewart, S. H. (2017) · Journal of Gambling Issues · doi:10.4309/jgi.2016.34.6 · Cited by 18
Small, A., Kampman, K. M., Plebani, J. G., Quinn, M. D. J., Peoples, L. L., & Lynch, K. G. (2009) · Substance Use & Misuse · doi:10.3109/10826080902961179 · Cited by 17 · cited 1×
“In humans, several reports have provided evidence of sensitization in psychostimulant drug users leading to enhanced drug-seeking, despite showing tolerance to the drug’s euphoric effects (Bartlett et al., 1997; Reed et al., 2009; Small et al., 2009).”
Zago, A., Leão, R. M., Carneiro-de-Oliveira, P. E., Marin, M. T., Cruz, F. C., & Planeta, C. S. (2012) · Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research · doi:10.1590/s0100-879x2011007500153 · Cited by 15 · cited 1×
“A study by Zago and colleagues demonstrated that the co-occurrence of repeated stress alongside chronic nicotine administration resulted in behavioral sensitization, particularly in adolescent animals (Zago et al., 2012).”
McGrath, D. S., Dorbeck, A., & Barrett, S. P. (2013) · Behavioural Pharmacology · doi:10.1097/fbp.0b013e32835f3cff · Cited by 14
Isomura, T., Suzuki, J., & Murai, T. (2014) · Addiction Research & Theory · doi:10.3109/16066359.2013.793312 · Cited by 12
Neugebauer, N. M., Cortright, J. J., Sampedro, G. R., & Vezina, P. (2014) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.11.035 · Cited by 12
Robinson, M. J. F., & Berridge, K. C. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.26091-1 · Cited by 6 · cited 1×
“…of incentive salience, or Bwanting,^ to rewards and reward-related cues may contribute to the development and persistence of gambling pathology (M. J. F. Robinson & Berridge, 2015; M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b; Rømer Thomsen, Fjorback, Møller, & Lou, 2014).”
Self-citationIncentive Motivation and Incentive Salience
Berridge, K. C. (2010) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-045396-5.00166-4 · Cited by 3 · cited 1×
“…involving elevated corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), a hormone highly implicated in the stress response, recruits activity in dopaminergic pathways and elevates dopaminergic activity (Berridge, 2010; Cuadra, Zurita, Lacerra, & Molina, 1999; Dallman, 2010; Peciña, Schulkin, & Berridge, 2006).”
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5®). (A. P. Association, Ed.). Arlington: American Psychiatric Association.
- Balfour, D. J. K. (2015b). The role of mesoaccumbens dopamine in nicotine dependence. Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences, 24(Chapter 3), 55–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13482-6_3 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A taxonomy of technology design features that promote potentially addictive online behaviours
Flayelle, M., Brevers, D., King, D. L., Maurage, P., Perales, J. C., & Billieux, J. (2023) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-023-00153-4 · Cited by 195
Positive affect: nature and brain bases of liking and wanting
Nguyen, D. P., Naffziger, E. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2021) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.013 · Cited by 126
Shchaslyvyi, A. Y., Antonenko, S. V., & Telegeev, G. D. (2024) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph21081077 · Cited by 73
Buchanan, T. W., McMullin, S. D., Baxley, C., & Weinstock, J. (2019) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.09.004 · Cited by 66
From sign-tracking to attentional bias: Implications for gambling and substance use disorders
Anselme, P., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2020) · Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.109861 · Cited by 48
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hellberg, S. N., Russell, T. I., & Robinson, M. J. F.
- Affiliations
- Wesleyan University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robinson, Mike J. F.
- Venue
- Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
- Published
- 2018-10-24
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 737-758
- ISSN
- 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-135X
- PMC
- PMC6482104
- OpenAlex
- W2898505690
- Semantic Scholar
- d496089bd369e83f0139c87dca1afe06c2d1c3ca
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 288
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10
- FWCI
- 1.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R03DA045281)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Keywords
- gambling addiction, incentive-sensitization theory, reward uncertainty, stress, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, mesolimbic dopamine system, cross-sensitization, incentive salience, relapse, comorbidities, slot machines
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety Disorders, Cues, Gambling, Humans, Motivation, Reward, Substance-Related Disorders, Uncertainty
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
