Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26865020›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2016

Dopamine reward prediction-error signalling: a two-component response.

Wolfram Schultz

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07664631 (Effects of Stimulant Medications in PTSD), which is not on this map. Cited by 450 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
450citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07664631 phase1not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Stimulant Medications in PTSD

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ChicagoRan2026 to 2027Enrolled40ConditionsAdderall, PTSD, Post Traumatic Stress DisorderArmsPlacebo, Adderall
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

450 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. The Neurochemical Orchestra of the Runner's High: A Narrative Review of Neuromodulatory Mechanisms with a Focus on Endocannabinoids.The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry · 2026
    Review
  18. A Mouse-Tracking Paradigm for Value-Driven Attentional Capture.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

390 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

1 author.

Wolfram SchultzDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3DY, UK.

Funding

The Neurobiology of Social Decision-Making: Social Inference and ContextP50MH094258 · NIMH · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI O'DOHERTY, JOHN P · 2012 to 2021
$18.6M
NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH094258NIMH NIH HHS P50MH094258Wellcome Trust 058365Wellcome Trust 093270Wellcome Trust 093875Wellcome Trust 095495
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental stimuli and objects, including rewards, are often processed sequentially in the brain. Recent work suggests that the phasic dopamine reward prediction-error response follows a similar sequential pattern. An initial brief, unselective and highly sensitive increase in activity unspecifically detects a wide range of environmental stimuli, then quickly evolves into the main response component, which reflects subjective reward value and utility. This temporal evolution allows the dopamine reward prediction-error signal to optimally combine speed and accuracy.

Indexed as

RewardAnimalsDopamineHumansNeuronsSignal TransductionDopamine

Identifiers

PMID26865020
PMCPMC5549862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.