MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dopamine Transmission in the Human Striatum during Monetary Reward Tasks

2004· article· en· W2103073562 on OpenAlexaff
David H. Zald, Isabelle Boileau, Wael El‐Deredy, Roger N. Gunn, Francis McGlone, Gabriel S. Dichter, Alain Dagher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDopamineStriatumNeurosciencePsychologyVentral striatumTransmission (telecommunications)Cognitive psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have demonstrated the ability of the [11C]raclopride positron emission tomography (PET) technique to measure behaviorally induced changes in endogenous dopamine transmission in humans. However, these studies have lacked well matched sensorimotor control conditions, making it difficult to know what sensory, cognitive, or motor features contributed to changes in dopaminergic activity. Here we report on [11C]raclopride PET studies in which healthy humans performed card selection tasks for monetary rewards. During separate scans, subjects completed a variable ratio (VR) reward schedule with a 25% reward rate in which they did not know the outcome of their responses in advance, a fixed ratio (FR) 25% reward schedule in which outcomes were fully predictable, and a sensorimotor control (SC) condition involving similar sensory and motor demands but no rewards. Relative to the SC condition, the FR schedule produced only modest increases in dopamine transmission and no decreases relative to the SC condition. In contrast, the VR schedule produced significant increases in dopamine transmission in the left medial caudate nucleus while simultaneously producing significant decreases in other areas of the caudate and putamen. These data indicate: (1) the feasibility of measuring alterations in dopamine transmission even after controlling for sensorimotor features and (2) the complex and regionally specific influence of VR schedules on dopamine transmission. The implications of these results are discussed in relation to conflicting models of dopaminergic functioning arising from studies using electrophysiological and microdialysis techniques in animals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations242
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorFrench-language works237,207