MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788473810 · doi:10.1177/0269881118756059

Reward motivation in humans and its relationship to dopamine D <sub>2/3</sub> receptor availability: A pilot study with dual [ <sup>11</sup> C]-raclopride and [ <sup>11</sup> C]-(+)-PHNO imaging

2018· article· en· W2788473810 on OpenAlex
Fernando Caravaggio, Gagan Fervaha, Caleb J. Browne, Philip Gerretsen, Gary Remington, Ariel Graff‐Guerrero

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychopharmacology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacloprideVentral striatumPsychologyStriatumReward systemPutamenDopamine receptor D2DopamineGlobus pallidusDopaminergicNeuroscienceBasal gangliaDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicineMedicineCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rodent studies suggest that dopamine signaling at D 2/3 receptors in the ventral striatum is critical for reward motivation. Whether this is also true in humans is unclear. Positron emission tomography studies in healthy humans have generally not observed a relationship between D 2/3 receptor availability in the ventral striatum and motivation. We developed the “mounting-effort for reward task” to assess high motivational demand for (a) gaining money (CS+), (b) losing money or avoiding electric shock (CS−), and (c) non-reward (Neutral). Receipt was contingent on participants making sufficient button responses relative to a “reward-threshold” determined by prior motor performance. This reward-threshold was dynamically increased if surpassed, making the task increasingly more difficult on every trial. The mounting-effort for reward task was preliminarily validated in 29 healthy volunteers (mean age: 25.83±3.58; 15 female). In this sample, %CS+ and %CS− significantly correlated with different dimensions of self-reported apathy. In a sub-sample of eight healthy volunteers (mean age: 25.75±1.91; four female), the mounting-effort for reward task demonstrated good test-retest reliability (%variance: 0.20–2.61%). Seven healthy male volunteers (mean age: 31.14±5.43) completed the mounting-effort for reward task and provided both [ 11 C]-raclopride and [ 11 C]-(+)-PHNO PET scans to assess D 2/3 receptor availability. %CS+ and %CS− were positively correlated with [ 11 C]-raclopride binding in the dorsal striatum. %CS+, %Cs−, and %Neutral were positively correlated with [ 11 C]-(+)-PHNO binding in the globus pallidus. Thus, increased expression of D 2 receptors in the dorsal striatum, and D 3 receptors in the globus pallidus, may be related to motivation for rewards. Larger positron emission tomography studies are required to formally validate the mounting-effort for reward task and replicate our pilot findings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.278 · 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