ArticleThe Journal of comparative neurology2021
Mapping reward mechanisms by intracerebral self-stimulation in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta).
Article in The Journal of comparative neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stress tests and biomarkers of resilience: Proceedings of the second state of resilience science conference.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
- A dopamine mechanism for reward maximization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of the study was to identify brain structures that mediate reward as evidenced by positive reinforcing effects of stimuli on behavior. Testing by intracerebral self-stimulation enabled monkeys to inform whether activation of ~2900 sites in 74 structures of 4 sensorimotor pathways and 4 modulatory loop pathways was positive, negative or neutral. Stimulation was rewarding at 30% of sites, negative at 17%, neutral at 52%. Virtually all (99%) structures yielded some positive or negative sites, suggesting a ubiquitous distribution of pathways transmitting valence information. Mapping of sites to structures with dense versus sparse dopaminergic (DA) or noradrenergic (NA) innervation showed that stimulation of DA-pathways was rewarding or neutral. Stimulation of NA-pathways was not rewarding. Stimulation of association areas was generally rewarding; stimulation of purely sensory or motor structures was generally negative. Reward related more to structures' sensorimotor function than to density of DA-innervation. Stimulation of basal ganglia loop pathways was rewarding except in lateral globus pallidus, an inhibitory structure in the negative feedback loop; stimulation of the cerebellar loop was rewarding in anterior vermis and the spinocerebellar pathway; and stimulation of the hippocampal CA1 loop was rewarding. While most positive sites were in the DA reward system, numerous sites in sparsely DA-innervated posterior cingulate and parietal cortices may represent a separate reward system. DA-density represents concentrations of plastic synapses that mediate acquisition of new synaptic connections. DA-sparse areas may represent innate, genetically programmed reward-associated pathways. Implications of findings in regard to response habituation and addiction are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.