Reward comparison: the Achilles' heel and hope for addiction

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In the words of the late Charles Flaherty, reward comparison is commonplace. Rats and humans, it appears, compare all rewards and this capacity probably contributes to our ability to select the most appropriate reward/behavior (food, water, salt and sex), at the most ideal level (e.g. a certain sweetness), at any given time. A second advantage of our predisposition for reward comparison is that the availability of rich alternative rewards can protect against our becoming addicted to any single reward/behavior. Thus, the potential protective effects of natural rewards/enrichment are addressed. Despite this, behavior can become inflexible when, through the development of addiction, stress, drug or cues elicit craving, withdrawal, and ultimately, drug-seeking. Drug-seeking corresponds with a 'window of inopportunity', when even potent natural rewards have little or no impact on behavior. During this time, there is a unitary solution to the need state, and that solution is drug. The present animal model explores this 'window of inopportunity' when natural rewards are devalued and drug-seeking is engaged and considers a mode of possible intervention.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)227-233
Number of pages7
JournalDrug Discovery Today: Disease Models
Volume5
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2008

Fingerprint

Hope
Reward
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Aptitude
Substance-Related Disorders
Cues
Animal Models
Salts

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Molecular Medicine
  • Drug Discovery

Cite this

@article{5ef99b039bd34c3785e74c9b23774f66,
title = "Reward comparison: the Achilles' heel and hope for addiction",
abstract = "In the words of the late Charles Flaherty, reward comparison is commonplace. Rats and humans, it appears, compare all rewards and this capacity probably contributes to our ability to select the most appropriate reward/behavior (food, water, salt and sex), at the most ideal level (e.g. a certain sweetness), at any given time. A second advantage of our predisposition for reward comparison is that the availability of rich alternative rewards can protect against our becoming addicted to any single reward/behavior. Thus, the potential protective effects of natural rewards/enrichment are addressed. Despite this, behavior can become inflexible when, through the development of addiction, stress, drug or cues elicit craving, withdrawal, and ultimately, drug-seeking. Drug-seeking corresponds with a 'window of inopportunity', when even potent natural rewards have little or no impact on behavior. During this time, there is a unitary solution to the need state, and that solution is drug. The present animal model explores this 'window of inopportunity' when natural rewards are devalued and drug-seeking is engaged and considers a mode of possible intervention.",
author = "Grigson-Kennedy, {Patricia {"}Sue{"}}",
year = "2008",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ddmod.2009.03.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
pages = "227--233",
journal = "Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models",
issn = "1740-6757",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "4",

}

Reward comparison : the Achilles' heel and hope for addiction. / Grigson-Kennedy, Patricia "Sue".

In: Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models, Vol. 5, No. 4, 01.12.2008, p. 227-233.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reward comparison

T2 - the Achilles' heel and hope for addiction

AU - Grigson-Kennedy, Patricia "Sue"

PY - 2008/12/1

Y1 - 2008/12/1

N2 - In the words of the late Charles Flaherty, reward comparison is commonplace. Rats and humans, it appears, compare all rewards and this capacity probably contributes to our ability to select the most appropriate reward/behavior (food, water, salt and sex), at the most ideal level (e.g. a certain sweetness), at any given time. A second advantage of our predisposition for reward comparison is that the availability of rich alternative rewards can protect against our becoming addicted to any single reward/behavior. Thus, the potential protective effects of natural rewards/enrichment are addressed. Despite this, behavior can become inflexible when, through the development of addiction, stress, drug or cues elicit craving, withdrawal, and ultimately, drug-seeking. Drug-seeking corresponds with a 'window of inopportunity', when even potent natural rewards have little or no impact on behavior. During this time, there is a unitary solution to the need state, and that solution is drug. The present animal model explores this 'window of inopportunity' when natural rewards are devalued and drug-seeking is engaged and considers a mode of possible intervention.

AB - In the words of the late Charles Flaherty, reward comparison is commonplace. Rats and humans, it appears, compare all rewards and this capacity probably contributes to our ability to select the most appropriate reward/behavior (food, water, salt and sex), at the most ideal level (e.g. a certain sweetness), at any given time. A second advantage of our predisposition for reward comparison is that the availability of rich alternative rewards can protect against our becoming addicted to any single reward/behavior. Thus, the potential protective effects of natural rewards/enrichment are addressed. Despite this, behavior can become inflexible when, through the development of addiction, stress, drug or cues elicit craving, withdrawal, and ultimately, drug-seeking. Drug-seeking corresponds with a 'window of inopportunity', when even potent natural rewards have little or no impact on behavior. During this time, there is a unitary solution to the need state, and that solution is drug. The present animal model explores this 'window of inopportunity' when natural rewards are devalued and drug-seeking is engaged and considers a mode of possible intervention.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=71549169938&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=71549169938&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ddmod.2009.03.005

DO - 10.1016/j.ddmod.2009.03.005

M3 - Review article

C2 - 20016772

AN - SCOPUS:71549169938

VL - 5

SP - 227

EP - 233

JO - Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models

JF - Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models

SN - 1740-6757

IS - 4

ER -