↓ Skip to main content

Functional Polymorphism of the Mu-Opioid Receptor Gene (OPRM1) Influences Reinforcement Learning in Humans

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Functional Polymorphism of the Mu-Opioid Receptor Gene (OPRM1) Influences Reinforcement Learning in Humans
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0024203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary R. Lee, Courtney L. Gallen, Xiaochu Zhang, Colin A. Hodgkinson, David Goldman, Elliot A. Stein, Christina S. Barr

Abstract

Previous reports on the functional effects (i.e., gain or loss of function), and phenotypic outcomes (e.g., changes in addiction vulnerability and stress response) of a commonly occurring functional single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of the mu-opioid receptor (OPRM1 A118G) have been inconsistent. Here we examine the effect of this polymorphism on implicit reward learning. We used a probabilistic signal detection task to determine whether this polymorphism impacts response bias to monetary reward in 63 healthy adult subjects: 51 AA homozygotes and 12 G allele carriers. OPRM1 AA homozygotes exhibited typical responding to the rewarded response--that is, their bias to the rewarded stimulus increased over time. However, OPRM1 G allele carriers exhibited a decline in response to the rewarded stimulus compared to the AA homozygotes. These results extend previous reports on the heritability of performance on this task by implicating a specific polymorphism. Through comparison with other studies using this task, we suggest a possible mechanism by which the OPRM1 polymorphism may confer reduced response to natural reward through a dopamine-mediated decrease during positive reinforcement learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 24%
Student > Bachelor 12 19%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Professor 4 6%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 17 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#8,000,390
of 24,065,546 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#100,340
of 206,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,997
of 127,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,065
of 2,558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,065,546 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 206,547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 127,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.