Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29020291›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of neuropsychopharmacology2017

Reward Sensitivity and Waiting Impulsivity: Shift towards Reward Valuation away from Action Control.

Daisy J Mechelmans, Daniela Strelchuk, Nuria Doñamayor, Paula Banca, Trevor W Robbins, Kwangyeol Baek, Valerie Voon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The myeloarchitecture of impulsivity: premature responding in youth is associated with decreased myelination of ventral putamen.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

7 authors.

Daisy J MechelmansDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Daniela StrelchukDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Nuria DoñamayorDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Paula BancaDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Trevor W RobbinsDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Kwangyeol BaekDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Valerie VoonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom; KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven, Belgium; Behavioural and Clinical Neurosciences Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom; NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0001354Medical Research Council G1000183Medical Research Council MR/P008747/1Wellcome Trust 093705/Z/10/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Impulsivity and reward expectancy are commonly interrelated. Waiting impulsivity, measured using the rodent 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time task, predicts compulsive cocaine seeking and sign (or cue) tracking. Here, we assess human waiting impulsivity using a novel translational task, the 4-Choice Serial Reaction Time task, and the relationship with reward cues. Methods: Healthy volunteers (n=29) performed the monetary incentive delay task as a functional MRI study where subjects observe a cue predicting reward (cue) and wait to respond for high (£5), low (£1), or no reward. Waiting impulsivity was tested with the 4-Choice Serial Reaction Time task. Results: For high reward prospects (£5, no reward), greater waiting impulsivity on the 4-CSRT correlated with greater medial orbitofrontal cortex and lower supplementary motor area activity to cues. In response to high reward cues, greater waiting impulsivity was associated with greater subthalamic nucleus connectivity with orbitofrontal cortex and greater subgenual cingulate connectivity with anterior insula, but decreased connectivity with regions implicated in action selection and preparation. Conclusion: These findings highlight a shift towards regions implicated in reward valuation and a shift towards compulsivity away from higher level motor preparation and action selection and response. We highlight the role of reward sensitivity and impulsivity, mechanisms potentially linking human waiting impulsivity with incentive approach and compulsivity, theories highly relevant to disorders of addiction.

Indexed as

RewardAdultBrainChoice BehaviorCuesFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalImpulsive BehaviorMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMotivationNeural PathwaysOxygenPhotic StimulationOxygenimpulsivitymonetary incentive delayorbitofrontal cortexrewardsupplementary motor area

Identifiers

PMID29020291
PMCPMC5716204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.