Striatal connectivity changes following gambling wins and near-misses: Associations with gambling severity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frontostriatal circuitry is implicated in the cognitive distortions associated with gambling behaviour. 'Near-miss' events, where unsuccessful outcomes are proximal to a jackpot win, recruit overlapping neural circuitry with actual monetary wins. Personal control over a gamble (e.g., via choice) is also known to increase confidence in one's chances of winning (the 'illusion of control'). Using psychophysiological interaction (PPI) analyses, we examined changes in functional connectivity as regular gamblers and non-gambling participants played a slot-machine game that delivered wins, near-misses and full-misses, and manipulated personal control. We focussed on connectivity with striatal seed regions, and associations with gambling severity, using voxel-wise regression. For the interaction term of near-misses (versus full-misses) by personal choice (participant-chosen versus computer-chosen), ventral striatal connectivity with the insula, bilaterally, was positively correlated with gambling severity. In addition, some effects for the contrast of wins compared to all non-wins were observed at an uncorrected (p < .001) threshold: there was an overall increase in connectivity between the striatal seeds and left orbitofrontal cortex and posterior insula, and a negative correlation for gambling severity with the connectivity between the right ventral striatal seed and left anterior cingulate cortex. These findings corroborate the 'non-categorical' nature of reward processing in gambling: near-misses and full-misses are objectively identical outcomes that are processed differentially. Ventral striatal connectivity with the insula correlated positively with gambling severity in the illusion of control contrast, which could be a risk factor for the cognitive distortions and loss-chasing that are characteristic of problem gambling.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".