↓ Skip to main content

A Neural Computational Model of Incentive Salience

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Readers on

mendeley
302 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
A Neural Computational Model of Incentive Salience
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, July 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000437
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Zhang, Kent C. Berridge, Amy J. Tindell, Kyle S. Smith, J. Wayne Aldridge

Abstract

Incentive salience is a motivational property with 'magnet-like' qualities. When attributed to reward-predicting stimuli (cues), incentive salience triggers a pulse of 'wanting' and an individual is pulled toward the cues and reward. A key computational question is how incentive salience is generated during a cue re-encounter, which combines both learning and the state of limbic brain mechanisms. Learning processes, such as temporal-difference models, provide one way for stimuli to acquire cached predictive values of rewards. However, empirical data show that subsequent incentive values are also modulated on the fly by dynamic fluctuation in physiological states, altering cached values in ways requiring additional motivation mechanisms. Dynamic modulation of incentive salience for a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS or cue) occurs during certain states, without necessarily requiring (re)learning about the cue. In some cases, dynamic modulation of cue value occurs during states that are quite novel, never having been experienced before, and even prior to experience of the associated unconditioned reward in the new state. Such cases can include novel drug-induced mesolimbic activation and addictive incentive-sensitization, as well as natural appetite states such as salt appetite. Dynamic enhancement specifically raises the incentive salience of an appropriate CS, without necessarily changing that of other CSs. Here we suggest a new computational model that modulates incentive salience by integrating changing physiological states with prior learning. We support the model with behavioral and neurobiological data from empirical tests that demonstrate dynamic elevations in cue-triggered motivation (involving natural salt appetite, and drug-induced intoxication and sensitization). Our data call for a dynamic model of incentive salience, such as presented here. Computational models can adequately capture fluctuations in cue-triggered 'wanting' only by incorporating modulation of previously learned values by natural appetite and addiction-related states.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 302 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Brazil 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 279 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 84 28%
Researcher 63 21%
Student > Master 29 10%
Student > Bachelor 23 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 20 7%
Other 50 17%
Unknown 33 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 87 29%
Neuroscience 54 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 5%
Computer Science 15 5%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 46 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 07 January 2016.
All research outputs
#2,002,563
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#1,774
of 9,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,978
of 113,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#10
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
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 113,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.