Neural Basis of Pleasure and Reward

Knapp, Clifford M.; Kornetsky, Conan

doi:10.1002/9780470478509.neubb002040

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 260 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, when individuals are exposed to certain food choices, the choices automatically evoke emotionally laden reactions (Shiv & Fedorikhin, 2002) similar to the pleasurable neurological responses observed when people anticipate financial reward (Knapp & Kornetsky, 2009, see Principle #17, p. 57). First, not all goal pursuits are within the realm of individual consciousness.…”

Section: Principle #33-individual Reaction To Incentives Is Variablementioning

confidence: 95%

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe

Hoffman

2015

Motivation for Learning and Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Principle #33-individual Reaction To Incentives Is Variablementioning

confidence: 95%

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe

Hoffman

2015

Motivation for Learning and Performance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Berridge and Kringelbach explain, “wanting for rewards is generated by a large and distributed brain system. Liking, or pleasure itself, is generated by a smaller set of hedonic hotspots within limbic circuitry.” ( Berridge and Kringelbach, 2015 , p. 646; see also Knapp and Kornetsky, 2009 ; Schubert, 2012 ; Lesage and Stein, 2016 ).…”

Section: Positive Affect As Spreading Activationmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Liking, or pleasure itself, is generated by a smaller set of hedonic hotspots within limbic circuitry." (Berridge and Kringelbach, 2015, p. 646; see also Knapp and Kornetsky, 2009;Schubert, 2012;Lesage and Stein, 2016).…”

Section: Positive Affect As Spreading Activationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creativity Is Optimal Novelty and Maximal Positive Affect: A New Definition Based on the Spreading Activation Model

Schubert

2021

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creativity is commonly defined as a process that leads to a novel and useful outcome (an idea, product, or expression). However, two dilemmas about this definition remain unresolved: (1) A strict application of usefulness is difficult to apply to artistic works: who decides what artwork is useful, and how it is useful? (2) The implied boundary conditions of novelty are problematic: The default perspective is that novelty has a monotonic increasing relationship with creativity, or it is categorical—i.e., novel or not. To address these dilemmas, this paper proposes a spreading activation model of creativity (SAMOC), a model built on a brain-architecture-inspired vast interconnected network of nodes, each node representing information, and assigned meanings through interaction with the environment. Nodes are linked to each other according to principles of temporal contiguity (linking objects/events in time) and similarity (linking objects/events by shared features). A node activated by attention spreads through the network through previously linked nodes. Nodes that are well connected activate each other easily, while those that are weakly connected do not. Net total activation corresponds to positive affect (e.g., pleasure), and this is proposed as an essential criteria for a creative work of art, instead of usefulness. SAMOC also predicts that creativity will be optimized at an intermediate, not extreme, level of novelty. Too much activation will occur with the activation of preexisting ideas (hence reproduction rather than creativity), and too much novelty will not produce spread of activation. The two functions (spreading activation and the novelty curve) are superposed to demonstrate this optimal novelty hypothesis. Early evidence of the hypothesis comes from the data that some great works of art were critically rejected at premiers (suggesting excessive novelty), but after sufficient repetition (and therefore linking) became suitably associated and commenced generating activation. The hypothesis has important implications for future empirical research programs on creativity, and for the definition of creativity itself.

show abstract

“…Emotional associations with cognitive entities typically engage the brain's reward system which includes orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and ventral striatum [14], whether the rewards come from drugs or natural reinforcers. The connections to OFC from other prefrontal association areas are likely to mediate the emotional valuation of ideas and concepts.…”

Section: Pleasure From Learning New Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

I think therefore I feel: Possible neural mechanisms for knowledge-based pleasure

Levine¹

2012

The 2012 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

─How do we feel pleasure from acquiring new information? How is that pleasure related to our curiosity about that information? We outline a neural theory of how information-based pleasure arises from a network involving association cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, striatum, opioids, and dopamine. 1. THE KNOWLEDGE INSTINCT AND ITS ATTENDANT EMOTIONS he drive by humans and other animals to understand their environments as deeply as possible has long been recognized by psychologists [1]. Perlovsky [2, 3] has described this drive as a knowledge instinct, a biological curiosity drive that can be comparably powerful to other biological drives such as those for food, sex, and safety. Perlovsky notes that emotions are linked to satisfaction or dissatisfaction of basic drives, based on a theory developed in [4]. In the case of the knowledge instinct, there is behavioral evidence for pleasure from satisfied curiosity [5] and displeasure from cognitive dissonance [6, 7]. Since the curiosity drive typically engages a higher level of processing than the hunger or sex drives, its attendant emotions are thought to be qualitatively different from the emotions attendant to those other drives, and related to the sense of the beautiful [8]. The notion of a knowledge instinct is not universally accepted in the scientific community. Neuroscientists and psychologists, and even more the general public, still often treat cognition and emotion as separate processes and resist the notion that one is attendant on the other.

show abstract

Neural Basis of Pleasure and Reward

Cited by 6 publications

References 260 publications

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe

Creativity Is Optimal Novelty and Maximal Positive Affect: A New Definition Based on the Spreading Activation Model

I think therefore I feel: Possible neural mechanisms for knowledge-based pleasure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About