↓ Skip to main content

Dopamine and Effort-Based Decision Making

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2011
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
147 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
435 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Dopamine and Effort-Based Decision Making
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2011.00081
Pubmed ID
Authors

Irma Triasih Kurniawan, Marc Guitart-Masip, Ray J. Dolan

Abstract

Motivational theories of choice focus on the influence of goal values and strength of reinforcement to explain behavior. By contrast relatively little is known concerning how the cost of an action, such as effort expended, contributes to a decision to act. Effort-based decision making addresses how we make an action choice based on an integration of action and goal values. Here we review behavioral and neurobiological data regarding the representation of effort as action cost, and how this impacts on decision making. Although organisms expend effort to obtain a desired reward there is a striking sensitivity to the amount of effort required, such that the net preference for an action decreases as effort cost increases. We discuss the contribution of the neurotransmitter dopamine (DA) toward overcoming response costs and in enhancing an animal's motivation toward effortful actions. We also consider the contribution of brain structures, including the basal ganglia and anterior cingulate cortex, in the internal generation of action involving a translation of reward expectation into effortful action.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 435 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 2%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 6 1%
Unknown 407 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 116 27%
Researcher 67 15%
Student > Master 55 13%
Student > Bachelor 53 12%
Professor 29 7%
Other 72 17%
Unknown 43 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 126 29%
Neuroscience 75 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 8%
Computer Science 13 3%
Other 54 12%
Unknown 67 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,794,912
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#1,790
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,785
of 190,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#14
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 190,474 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.