Dopamine release in ventral striatum of pathological gamblers losing money
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate dopaminergic neurotransmission in relation to monetary reward and punishment in pathological gambling. Pathological gamblers (PG) often continue gambling despite losses, known as 'chasing one's losses'. We therefore hypothesized that losing money would be associated with increased dopamine release in the ventral striatum of PG compared with healthy controls (HC). METHOD: We used Positron Emission Tomography (PET) with [(11)C]raclopride to measure dopamine release in the ventral striatum of 16 PG and 15 HC playing the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). RESULTS: PG who lost money had significantly increased dopamine release in the left ventral striatum compared with HC. PG and HC who won money did not differ in dopamine release. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a dopaminergic basis of monetary losses in pathological gambling, which might explain loss-chasing behavior. The findings may have implications for the understanding of dopamine dysfunctions and impaired decision-making in pathological gambling and substance-related addictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".