4.6 Review

Neural circuitry and mechanisms of waiting impulsivity: relevance to addiction

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2018.0145

关键词

nucleus accumbens; basal ganglia; prefrontal cortex; dopamine; endophenotypes; substance use disorder

类别

资金

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co (Biberach, Germany)
  2. Glaxo Smith Kline plc
  3. Medical Research Council [G0701500, G0802729, G1002231]
  4. British Academy [SG162310]
  5. NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre
  6. MRC [MR/N02530X/1, G0802729, G1002231, G0701500] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Impatience-the failure to wait or tolerate delayed rewards (e.g. food, drug and monetary incentives)-is a common behavioural tendency in humans. However, when rigidly and rapidly expressed with limited regard for future, often negative consequences, impatient or impulsive actions underlie and confer susceptibility for such diverse brain disorders as drug addiction, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and major depressive disorder. Consequently, 'waiting' impulsivity has emerged as a candidate endophenotype to inform translational research on underlying neurobiological mechanisms and biomarker discovery for many of the so-called impulsecontrol disorders. Indeed, as reviewed in this article, this research enterprise has revealed a number of unexpected targets and mechanisms for intervention. However, in the context of drug addiction, impulsive decisions that maximize short-term gains (e.g. acute drug consumption) over longer-term punishment (e.g. unemployment, homelessness, personal harm) defines one aspect of impulsivity, which may or may not be related to rapid, unrestrained actions over shorter timescales. We discuss the relevance of this distinction in impulsivity subtypes for drug addiction with reference to translational research in humans and other animals. This article is part of the theme issue 'Risk taking and impulsive behaviour: fundamental discoveries, theoretical perspectives and clinical implications'.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据