5 ms·
The difference is that actually addictive things, rather than just rewarding stimuli, produce increases in incentive salience regardless of actual reward outcom
by superkuh 7y ago
The difference is that actually addictive things, rather than just rewarding stimuli, produce increases in incentive salience regardless of actual reward outcome. In cigarettes this is mediated through nicotinic acetylcholine receptors on cells with inputs to dopaminergic systems that predict reward.
There's a vast distance between directly effecting the substrate of thinking chemically and reactions to rewarding stimuli coming in normally.
- sizzle 7y agoAnd what would that difference be when you are just describing different methods for affecting dopaminergic reward pathways? If you scan the brain with an fMRI, the reward pathway lights up and suggest over time you will have reinforced that pleasurable activity and have created a strong affinity towards repeated activations, further strengthening those pathways. Have there been any studies to show withdrawals from inhibiting consuming pleasurable visual media? I mean if you were watching a series on Netflix that really resonates with you and you make a strong connection with the characters and feel as if you are a part of the scenes taking place (game of thrones etc), with characters faces activating your fusiform gyrus and dramatic scenes activating your amygdala making you emotional etc, how is autoplay facilitating the pleasurable dopamine response from imagining/anticipating/looking forward to how great the next episode will be, not as compelling of an issue as consuming exogenous substances that activate similar dopamine release?
- krageon 7y agoAre you implying here that watching TV is not addictive? If this is the case, what do you think about videogames and why?