Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23748054›Full record

ReviewNeuropharmacology2014

Reward, interrupted: Inhibitory control and its relevance to addictions.

James David Jentsch, Zachary T Pennington

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neuropharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 129 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Associations Between Behavioral and Neural Correlates of Inhibitory Control and Amphetamine Reward Sensitivity.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2017
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Dopamine Supports Reward Prediction to Shape Reward-Pursuit Strategy.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James David JentschDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1563, USA; Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1563, USA; Semel Institute for Human Neuroscience and Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1563, USA; The Brain Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1563, USA. Electronic address: jentsch@psych.ucla.edu.
Zachary T Pennington
Neurobehavioral Systems · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

UCLA Training Program in Translational Neuroscience of Drug Abuse (TNDA)T32DA024635 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LARA A. RAY, Kate M Wassum · 2008 to 2026
$6.2M
Genetic Influences on Inhibitory Control and Cocaine SensitivityR01DA031852 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI JENTSCH, J. DAVID · 2012 to 2016
$1.7M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA031852NIDA NIH HHS R01-DA031852NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA024635NIDA NIH HHS T32-DA024635
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are broad individual differences in the ability to voluntarily and effortfully suppress motivated, reward-seeking behaviors, and this review presents the hypothesis that these individual differences are relevant to addictive disorders. On one hand, cumulative experience with drug abuse appears to alter the molecular, cellular and circuit mechanisms that mediate inhibitory abilities, leading to increasingly uncontrolled patterns of drug-seeking and -taking. On the other, native inter-individual differences in inhibitory control are apparently a risk factor for aspects of drug-reinforced responding and substance use disorders. In both cases, the behavioral manifestation of poor inhibitory abilities is linked to relatively low striatal dopamine D2-like receptor availability, and evidence is accumulating for a more direct contribution of striatopallidal neurons to cognitive control processes. Mechanistic research is now identifying genes upstream of dopamine transmission that mediate these relationships, as well as the involvement of other neurotransmitter systems, acting alone and in concert with dopamine. The reviewed research stands poised to identify new mechanisms that can be targeted by pharmacotherapies and/or by behavioral interventions that are designed to prevent or treat addictive behaviors and associated behavioral pathology. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'NIDA 40th Anniversary Issue'.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalRewardAnimalsBehavior, AddictiveCognition DisordersHumansImpulsive BehaviorCognitionCompulsivityDopamineExecutive functionImpulsivityMotivation

Identifiers

PMID23748054
PMCPMC4023480
OpenAlexW2061177718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.