Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36961734›Full record

ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2023

The psychometric properties and clinical utility of neural measures of reward processing.

Nader Amir, Amanda Holbrook, Emily Meissel, William Taboas

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Nader AmirDepartment of Psychology, Joint Doctoral Program at San Diego State University/University of California in San Diego, San Diego 92120, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7097-1206
Amanda HolbrookDepartment of Psychology, Joint Doctoral Program at San Diego State University/University of California in San Diego, San Diego 92120, USA.
Emily MeisselDepartment of Psychology, Joint Doctoral Program at San Diego State University/University of California in San Diego, San Diego 92120, USA.
William TaboasDepartment of Psychology, Joint Doctoral Program at San Diego State University/University of California in San Diego, San Diego 92120, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reward processing is implicated in the etiology of several psychological conditions including depressive disorders. In the current paper, we examined the psychometric properties of a neural measure of reward processing, the reward positivity (RewP), in 279 adult women at baseline and 187 women 8 weeks later. The RewP demonstrated excellent internal consistency at both timepoints and good test-retest reliability using estimates from both classical test theory and generalizability theory. Additionally, the difference between RewP following reward and loss feedback was marginally associated with depressive symptoms in a subsample of participants. We also examined the relationship between subject-level dependability estimates and depression severity, finding that depressive symptoms may contribute to lower dependability on reward trials. However, this finding did not survive correction for multiple comparisons and should be replicated in future studies. These findings support RewP as a useful measure of individual differences of reward processing and point to the potential utility of this measure for various forms of psychopathology.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsAdultFemaleHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsRewardFNpsychometric propertiesreliabilityreward processingRewPvalidity

Identifiers

PMID36961734
PMCPMC10039464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read53
reference markers read15
identifiers read1
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.