Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28670608›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in behavioral sciences2017

Neurobiological Basis of Individual Variation in Stimulus-Reward Learning.

Shelly B Flagel, Terry E Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Mouse-Tracking Paradigm for Value-Driven Attentional Capture.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Phasic dopamine encodes persistent attraction to reward cues.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Variants of the P3 event-related potential operate as indicators of distinct mechanisms contributing to problematic alcohol use.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

23 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.

Shelly B FlagelDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Terry E RobinsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

Sequencing CoreP50DA037844 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI MEYER, PAUL J · 2014 to 2023
$27.4M
Variation in Motivational Properties of Reward Cues: Implications for AddictionP01DA031656 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI ROBINSON, TERRY E. · 2012 to 2016
$6.3M
Dynamic control of cue-driven behavior via the paraventricular thalamic nucleusR01DA038599 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FLAGEL, SHELLY BETH · 2015 to 2019
$2.7M
NIDA NIH HHS P01 DA031656NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA037844NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA038599
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cues in the environment can guide behavior in adaptive ways, leading one towards valuable resources such as food, water, or a potential mate. However, cues in the environment may also serve as powerful motivators that lead to maladaptive patterns of behavior, such as addiction. Importantly, and central to this article, there is considerable individual variation in the extent to which reward cues gain motivational control over behavior. Here we describe an animal model that captures this individual variation, allowing us to better understand the psychological and neurobiological processes that contribute to cue-evoked behaviors. When a discrete cue is paired with a food reward in a Pavlovian manner it acquires greater control over motivated behavior in some rats ("sign-trackers, STs) than in others ("goal-trackers", GTs). We review studies that have exploited this animal model to parse the neurobiological mechanisms involved in learning associations between stimuli vs. those involved in attributing incentive salience to those same stimuli. The latter seems to be dependent on dopamine and subcortical circuits, whereas the former may engage more cortical "top-down" mechanisms.

Identifiers

PMID28670608
PMCPMC5486979

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.