↓ Skip to main content

Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation Increases Reward Responsiveness in Individuals with Higher Hedonic Capacity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation Increases Reward Responsiveness in Individuals with Higher Hedonic Capacity
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00294
Pubmed ID
Authors

Romain Duprat, Rudi De Raedt, Guo-Rong Wu, Chris Baeken

Abstract

Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been documented to influence striatal and orbitofrontal dopaminergic activity implicated in reward processing. However, the exact neuropsychological mechanisms of how DLPFC stimulation may affect the reward system and how trait hedonic capacity may interact with the effects remains to be elucidated. Objective: In this sham-controlled study in healthy individuals, we investigated the effects of a single session of neuronavigated intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) on reward responsiveness, as well as the influence of trait hedonic capacity. Methods: We used a randomized crossover single session iTBS design with an interval of 1 week. We assessed reward responsiveness using a rewarded probabilistic learning task and measured individual trait hedonic capacity (the ability to experience pleasure) with the temporal experience of pleasure scale questionnaire. Results: As expected, the participants developed a response bias toward the most rewarded stimulus (rich stimulus). Reaction time and accuracy for the rich stimulus were respectively shorter and higher as compared to the less rewarded stimulus (lean stimulus). Active or sham stimulation did not seem to influence the outcome. However, when taking into account individual trait hedonic capacity, we found an early significant increase in the response bias only after active iTBS. The higher the individual's trait hedonic capacity, the more the response bias toward the rich stimulus increased after the active stimulation. Conclusion: When taking into account trait hedonic capacity, one active iTBS session over the left DLPFC improved reward responsiveness in healthy male participants with higher hedonic capacity. This suggests that individual differences in hedonic capacity may influence the effects of iTBS on the reward system.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 12 24%
Psychology 11 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,376,252
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,277
of 7,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,874
of 326,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#154
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.