Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28469018›Full record

ReviewProceedings. Biological sciences2017

Pleasure junkies all around! Why it matters and why 'the arts' might be the answer: a biopsychological perspective.

Julia F Christensen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. A Theoretical Framework for How We Learn Aesthetic Values.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  11. The pleasure of art as a matter of fact.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Julia F ChristensenCognitive Neuroscience Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of London, London, UK julia.christensen.1@city.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0381-5101

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Today's society is pleasure seeking. We expect to obtain pleasurable experiences fast and easily. We are used to hyper-palatable foods and drinks, and we can get pornography, games and gadgets whenever we want them. THE PROBLEM: with this type of pleasure-maximizing choice behaviour we may be turning ourselves into mindless pleasure junkies, handing over our free will for the next dopamine shoot. Pleasure-only activities are fun. In excess, however, such activities might have negative effects on our biopsychological health: they provoke a change in the neural mechanisms underlying choice behaviour. Choice behaviour becomes biased towards short-term pleasure-maximizing goals, just as in the addicted brain (modulated by the amygdala, posterior ventromedial prefrontal cortex' (VMPFC), striatum, nucleus accumbens; 'A-system') and away from long-term prosperity and general well-being maximizing objectives (normally ensured by the insula, anterior VMPFC, hippocampus, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), anterior cingulate cortex (ACC); 'I-system'). This paper outlines, first, what 'pleasure' is and what 'pleasure-only' activities are (e.g. social media engagement, hyper-palatable eating). Second, an account is given of the type of action that might aid to maintain the neural systems underlying choice behaviour balanced. Finally, it is proposed that engagement with the arts might be an activity with the potential to foster healthy choice behaviour-and not be just for pleasure. The evidence in this rather new field of research is still piecemeal and inconclusive. This review aims to motivate targeted research in this domain.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorPleasureAmygdalaBrainBrain MappingHumansPrefrontal Cortexamygdalaempathyinsulapleasurethe arts

Identifiers

PMID28469018
PMCPMC5443939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.