ライフサイエンスコーパス: gambling

1 n-making, such as addiction and pathological gambling.

2 risk-taking in humans, such as pathological gambling.

3 s are less likely to be risk aversive during gambling.

4 l investments, career and health choices, or gambling.

5 erized by risky choices such as pathological gambling.

6 ncertainty on decision making extends beyond gambling.

7 h as drug abuse, overeating, or pathological gambling.

8 striatal dopamine synthesis in pathological gambling.

9 factors have been established for adolescent gambling.

10 in the treatment of adults with pathological gambling.

11 ed about the risks associated with excessive gambling.

12 owledge of the growing problem of adolescent gambling.

13 ficant reduction in severity of pathological gambling.

14 addressed in effective prevention of problem gambling.

15 elated functional impairment associated with gambling.

16 ischief, 6 (2%) for substances, and none for gambling.

17 5%) depicted substances, and 1 (1%) involved gambling.

18 d incarceration associated with recreational gambling.

19 ification of the dangers of products used in gambling.

20 , for instance, during foraging, trading, or gambling.

21 -related effects of neuroscience research on gambling.

22 risk-seeking behaviors, most pertinently in gambling.

23 utcomes confer vulnerability to pathological gambling.

24 g [F(1,9) = 9.2, P = 0.01] in the context of gambling.

25 aborations are needed to reduce the harms of gambling.

26 show promise in the treatment of disordered gambling.

27 ondition marked by excessive and problematic gambling.

28 th a lifetime history of DSM-IV pathological gambling, 36%-39% did not experience any gambling-relate

29 reward anticipation and in individuals with gambling addiction during reward outcome is in line with

30 of task settings affects reward responses in gambling addiction is debated.

31 e ventral striatum, whereas individuals with gambling addiction showed decreased activation in the do

32 across all addictions and for substance and gambling addictions separately.

33 anticipation, individuals with substance and gambling addictions showed decreased striatal activation

34 similar to what is observed in substance and gambling addictions, the neural and behavioral mechanism

35 ween technology addictions and substance and gambling addictions.

36 uncertainty can determine whether they find gambling addictive.

37 likely than younger adult gamblers to begin gambling after age 18 years, to gamble more frequently,

38 riate analyses investigating interactions of gambling and age found that higher rates of good to exce

39 terview-based diagnoses of past-year problem gambling and alcohol, cannabis, and nicotine dependence

40 wed by punding, compulsive sexual behaviour, gambling and buying disorder.

41 This pattern, also seen in gambling and cocaine use, may reflect a primary deficit

42 r, and even pathological conditions, such as gambling and drug addiction.

43 npharmacological treatments for pathological gambling and is based on a review of the literature publ

44 ve-behavioral therapy (CBT) for pathological gambling and its general principles and provides an exam

45 us of understanding of the neurobiologies of gambling and PG is described.

46 nsula, among others) have been implicated in gambling and PG.

47 pted suicide misestimate expected rewards on gambling and probabilistic learning tasks.OBJECTIVES-To

48 impulse control disorders (eg, pathological gambling and shopping, binge eating, and hypersexuality)

49 important and understudied component of both gambling and substance use disorders.

50 europsychiatric disorders, including problem gambling and suicidal behavior.

51 relationship between diminished control over gambling and the adverse socioeconomic consequences of g

52 d prognostic uses of neuroscience in problem gambling and the provision of novel tools (eg, virtual r

53 The relations between problem gambling and the substance-related addictive disorders (

54 atric disorders such as impulsivity, problem gambling, and addiction suggests that a common mechanism

55 disorder, Tourette's syndrome, pathological gambling, and addictions remain poorly understood, limit

56 epictions of violence, blood, sexual themes, gambling, and alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs; whether

57 luding substance use disorders, pathological gambling, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

58 order, substance use disorders, pathological gambling, and bipolar disorder.

59 range of behaviors including substance use, gambling, and risky sexual practice.

60 while they watched videos depicting cocaine, gambling, and sad scenarios to investigate the neural co

61 Problem and pathological gambling are associated with many impairments in quality

62 Pathological and problem gambling are associated with significant decrements in H

63 trol disorders (ICD), including pathological gambling, are common in Parkinson's disease (PD) and ten

64 oral addiction, with a focus on pathological gambling as the prototypical disorder.

65 Problem gambling at age 21 years was associated with higher scor

66 nd disorders including addiction, compulsive gambling, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and

67 t-year gamblers were compared on measures of gambling attitudes and behaviors.

68 y be an effective treatment in reducing both gambling behavior and affective instability in pathologi

69 s well as the comorbidity between disordered gambling behavior and other substance-related addictive

70 rtant role in explaining risk for disordered gambling behavior as well as the comorbidity between dis

71 Many of the risk factors for gambling behavior can be addressed in effective preventi

72 y be helpful in determining where disordered gambling behavior should reside in our diagnostic classi

73 a from a subset of twin pairs discordant for gambling behavior was used to control for genetic and fa

74 ately precede engagement in self-destructive gambling behavior.

75 influencing risky choices that may moderate gambling behaviors in humans, particularly in casino and

76 ling twins and their problem or pathological gambling brothers, but adjusted co-twin analyses resulte

77 may be associated with the addictiveness of gambling, but little is known about the neurocognitive m

78 ffective for some patients with pathological gambling, but those with comorbid conditions, such as bi

79 ntrol disorders (ICDs), including compulsive gambling, buying, sexual behavior, and eating, can occur

80 expected value had a stronger influence over gambling choices in adolescents relative to adults, an e

81 for addictive disorders such as pathological gambling, cigarette smoking, and drug and alcohol abuse.

82 e Compulsive Scale Modified for Pathological Gambling, compared to the placebo group.

83 In men with PG, gambling cue presentation elicits gambling urges and lea

84 When viewing gambling cues, PG subjects demonstrate relatively decrea

85 omoxetine could improve response inhibition, gambling decisions and reflection impulsivity.

86 y contrast, Bayesian analysis indicated that gambling decisions were better explained by models that

87 version and their respective contribution to gambling decisions.

88 ed a lifetime history of DSM-IV pathological gambling disorder (N=21 and N=185, respectively).

89 Neuroscientific explanations of gambling disorder can help people make sense of their ex

90 e-third of the individuals with pathological gambling disorder in these two nationally representative

91 y among individuals with DSM-IV pathological gambling disorder in two large and representative U.S. n

92 Impulse control disorders, including gambling disorder, binge eating disorder, compulsive sex

93 rn the established wisdom about pathological gambling disorder.

94 Gambling disorders commonly co-occur with other psychiat

95 th other substance use disorders, and moving gambling disorders to the chapter formerly reserved for

96 caudate head was positively correlated with gambling distortions in pathological gamblers.

97 ain anatomy alterations to other (substance, gambling etc.) addictions.

98 f individuals with a history of pathological gambling eventually recover, most without formal treatme

99 eversing a loss-induced effect (causing more gambling for gains than losses and the reverse) while le

100 nnabis, opiates, alcohol, nicotine, smokers, gambling, gamblers, gaming, and gamers.

101 e properties of these components in a simple gambling game that required participants to choose betwe

102 during viewing of videotaped scenarios with gambling, happy, or sad content.

103 acy of naltrexone treatment for pathological gambling has been replicated in a double-blind, placebo-

104 From the perspective of personality, problem gambling has much in common with the addictive disorders

105 ample of gamblers grouped by age at onset of gambling has not been performed.

106 The behaviors include pathological gambling, hypersexuality, compulsive shopping, and compu

107 psychiatric comorbid conditions and problem gambling (i.e. depression).

108 ry were estimated among individuals from the Gambling Impact and Behavior Study (N=2,417) and the Nat

109 The Gambling Impact and Behavior Study surveyed by telephone

110 There is a clear link between problem gambling in adolescence and pathologic gambling in adult

111 oblem gambling in adolescence and pathologic gambling in adulthood.

112 l-being correlates of past-year recreational gambling in adults age 65 years and older, compared to a

113 to findings in younger adults, recreational gambling in older adults is not associated with negative

114 Despite growing rates of recreational gambling in older adults, little is known regarding its

115 r amantadine as a treatment for pathological gambling in patients with Parkinson disease (PD).

116 d, sexual themes, profanity, substances, and gambling in the media remains a source of public health

117 Pathological gambling is a common disorder with severe consequences f

118 Pathological gambling is a disabling disorder experienced by approxim

119 Gambling is a naturalistic example of risky decision-mak

120 Gambling is a prevalent behavior, yet few studies have i

121 Pathological gambling is a psychiatric disorder and the first recogni

122 For many, gambling is a recreational activity that is performed pe

123 Adolescent-onset gambling is associated with more severe psychiatric prob

124 Pathological gambling is described in DSM-IV as a chronic and persist

125 role in the pathophysiology of pathological gambling is pervasive.

126 increasing overall prevalence of adolescent gambling, it is imperative that pediatricians appreciate

127 medical diagnoses, devastating financial or gambling losses) immediately preceding and triggering th

128 y environmental effects on HRQoL and problem gambling.Main Outcome Measure Health-related quality of

129 arge epidemiological surveys of pathological gambling may eventually overturn the established wisdom

130 iodically without ill effects, but for some, gambling may interfere with life functioning.

131 Pathological gambling may not always follow a chronic and persisting

132 new pharmacological agents for pathological gambling, N-acetyl cysteine and modafinil, produced sign

133 A commonly reported ICD is pathological gambling of which risk taking is a prominent feature.

134 Gambling on a long shot, whether a horse at the racetrac

135 fail, as in mental disorders such as problem gambling or addiction, the results can be disastrous.

136 Fourteen impulse control disorder (problem gambling or compulsive shopping) and 14 matched Parkinso

137 vioral phenotypes (such as in uncontrollable gambling or eating).

138 task-switching, and reward-based tasks like gambling or reversal learning.

139 Pathological behaviors such as problem gambling or shopping are characterized by compulsive cho

140 addictions, that certain activities such as gambling or video-game play may be considered addictive

141 Cognitive distortions regarding gambling outcomes confer vulnerability to pathological g

142 jects learning to associate masked cues with gambling outcomes to maximize their payoff.

143 ay render them overoptimistic with regard to gambling outcomes.

144 measured behavioral and neural responses to gambling outcomes.

145 than 18 years; recreational substance use or gambling; participants at risk for addictive behaviors;

146 e need to identify subgroups of pathological gambling patients with bipolar spectrum conditions becau

147 Forty pathological gambling patients with bipolar spectrum disorders entere

148 Pathological gambling patients with bipolar spectrum disorders signif

149 Additional analyses compared the gambling patterns in older and younger adult past-year r

150 Recreational gambling patterns of older adults differ from those of y

151 avorable and unfavorable outcomes during the gambling period.

152 ehavioral addiction phenotypes: pathological gambling (PG) and binge eating disorder (BED).

153 ty have both been implicated in pathological gambling (PG) and in reward processing.

154 Although pathological gambling (PG) and major depression (MD) frequently co-oc

155 ause of shared characteristics, pathological gambling (PG) has been variously conceptualized as an ob

156 Gambling urges in pathological gambling (PG) often immediately precede engagement in se

157 ll individuals in treatment for pathological gambling (PG), but relatively little is known about the

158 oth cocaine dependence (CD) and pathological gambling (PG), few studies have directly investigated ne

159 A diagnostic entity, pathological gambling (PG), is currently used to define a condition m

160 amygdalar function, and link to pathological gambling (PG).

161 During gambling, players typically display an array of cognitiv

162 e, value-independent) gambling propensity, a gambling preference scaling with the amount/variance, an

163 amounts of money in 15 patients with problem gambling (PRGs) and 16 healthy control subjects (HCs).

164 mperative that pediatricians appreciate that gambling problems can also afflict adolescents.

165 nd the adverse socioeconomic consequences of gambling problems.

166 diction disorders, the cues inherent in many gambling procedures are thought to play an important rol

167 tcomes are proximal to the jackpot, increase gambling propensity and may be associated with the addic

168 pended on a baseline (ie, value-independent) gambling propensity, a gambling preference scaling with

169 ncreased just the value-independent baseline gambling propensity, leaving the other components unaffe

170 atings as well as a questionnaire measure of gambling propensity.

171 Disordered gambling refers to the full continuum of gambling-relate

172 generally lacking from these procedures are gambling related cues that may moderate risk preferences

173 changes similar to previous research lacking gambling related cues.

174 Animal models of gambling-related behavior, while capturing dimensions of

175 tudy investigated brain regions underpinning gambling-related cognitive distortions, contrasting pati

176 nal imaging studies of reward processing and gambling-related cognitive distortions.

177 may be further increased by the presence of gambling-related cues in the environment, but the extent

178 at have highlighted the transitory nature of gambling-related problems have called into question whet

179 cal gambling, 36%-39% did not experience any gambling-related problems in the past year, even though

180 red gambling refers to the full continuum of gambling-related problems that includes PG disorder.

181 ilored larger-but-later rewards while visual gambling-related scenes were presented in the background

182 the environment, but the extent to which the gambling relatedness of task settings affects reward res

183 Considerations for future directions in gambling research, with a view towards translating neuro

184 Within each gambling round, the accumulation of gains gradually incr

185 l Global Impression severity of pathological gambling scale.

186 +/- SD greater gambling urges after viewing gambling scenarios vs control subjects (n = 11) (5.20 +/

187 ere distinct from those corresponding to the gambling scenarios.

188 during the initial period of viewing of the gambling scenarios: PG subjects displayed relatively dec

189 te compared to placebo on total pathological gambling scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive S

190 Furthermore, the negative relation between gambling severity and amygdala activation in gain expect

191 hly significant negative correlation between gambling severity scores and right amygdala activation a

192 Of note, improvement in gambling severity was significantly correlated with impr

193 Outcome measures included gambling severity, mood, anxiety, and impulsivity scales

194 include hypersexuality as well as compulsive gambling, shopping, and eating, and these behaviors are

195 in humans, particularly in casino and other gambling-specific environments.

196 D (17.6% vs 12.4%, p < 0.001) and compulsive gambling specifically (7.4% vs 4.2%, p < 0.001).

197 to the presentation of the most provocative gambling stimuli.

198 rates of treatment-seeking for pathological gambling suggests that natural recovery might be common.

199 The Iowa gambling task (IGT) is one of the most influential behav

200 rticipants, while they took part in the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a monetary decision making task tha

201 ociation with cognition, especially the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), and with schizophrenic psychopathol

202 sion making can be quantified using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), which requires choosing between adv

203 impulsive decision making, we used the Iowa Gambling task (IGT).

204 ith pramipexole or placebo by using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT).

205 We developed the rat gambling task (rGT) to investigate the neurobiology unde

206 ing win-associated audiovisual cues to a rat gambling task (rGT) would influence decision making.

207 To address this question, we used a gambling task and a model-based analytic approach to mea

208 DM patients were impaired at the Iowa Gambling Task and also at planning.

209 ng correct decisions in blindsight, the Iowa gambling task and an artificial grammar task.

210 Here we show with a gambling task and functional magnetic resonance imaging

211 ee different decision-making tasks: the Iowa Gambling Task and two recently developed tasks that atte

212 reduces risky gambling when the training and gambling task are separated by 24 hours.

213 The Gambling Task can be used with adolescents.

214 sensitivity to negative feedback on the Iowa Gambling Task compared to the other three groups.

215 ormance in specific domains of the Cambridge Gambling Task correlated inversely and specifically with

216 aking over 3 million decisions, who played a gambling task designed to measure the latent causes and

217 bjects played a modified version of the Iowa Gambling Task during MR scanning.

218 ealthy control subjects (n = 23) completed a gambling task featuring a decision between a gamble and

219 elucidate its neural basis, we used a novel gambling task in conjunction with functional magnetic re

220 ication in 18 healthy human subjects using a gambling task in fMRI.

221 e, we investigate human decision-making in a gambling task in which the informational value of each t

222 ty of single neurons in monkeys performing a gambling task in which the reward outcome of each choice

223 cally preferred the risky target in a visual gambling task in which they chose between two targets of

224 and adult participants performed a monetary gambling task in which they chose to accept or reject ga

225 Using functional imaging during a simple gambling task in which we constantly changed risk, we sh

226 high-reward objects shown as primes before a gambling task increased financial risk taking.

227 d dopamine release to conditioned cues and a gambling task on [(11)C]raclopride positron emission tom

228 acquired while the participants performed a gambling task predicting whether they would win or lose

229 The authors tested the hypothesis that lower Gambling Task scores would be associated with lower rest

230 ementary eye field (SEF) of monkeys during a gambling task that allowed us to distinguish chosen good

231 (20 males and 20 females) while performing a gambling task that involved monetary loss and gain.

232 We used the Cambridge Gambling Task to characterize decision-making and risk-t

233 atement: We used a rodent analog of the Iowa Gambling Task to determine whether the addition of audio

234 We combined functional imaging with a simple gambling task to vary expected reward and risk simultane

235 imaging (fMRI) data during performance of a gambling task where blocks comprise values drawn from on

236 ices made by two rhesus macaques in a visual gambling task while we varied the delay between trials.

237 ing vmPFC neurons while macaques performed a gambling task with asynchronous offer presentation.

238 res designed to measure decision-making (the Gambling Task), social functioning, as well as personali

239 e probabilities are ambiguous (e.g. the Iowa Gambling Task).

240 pression with medication, completed the Iowa Gambling Task, a measure of decision making in the face

241 individuals make poor decisions on the Iowa Gambling Task, a reward-related decision-making task tha

242 Indeed, studies with the Iowa Gambling Task, a standard measure of risk-based decision

243 Performance on the Gambling Task, a test of decision making, is a putative

244 e between the good and bad decks of the Iowa Gambling Task, and that healthy participants even have c

245 surgical patient while he performed the Iowa Gambling Task, and we concurrently measured behavioral,

246 ificantly correlated with performance on the Gambling Task, but orbitofrontal cortex rCBF did not.

247 We demonstrate this independence in a gambling task, by selectively reversing a loss-induced e

248 Participants played the Iowa Gambling Task, during which only experimental participan

249 Participants completed a gambling task, embedded within an emotional working memo

250 As in the Iowa Gambling Task, favoring options associated with smaller

251 Here we show, in a gambling task, that human subjects' choices can be chara

252 As in the Iowa Gambling task, the optimal strategy is to avoid choosing

253 s) recorded in humans during a probabilistic gambling task, we show that individuals' behavioral tend

254 ala (BLA) in acquisition of the rGT and Iowa Gambling task, we used a contralateral disconnection les

255 es, and performed worse on the modified Iowa Gambling Task.

256 imensional Set Shift Task, and the Cambridge Gambling Task.

257 tive decision making as measured by the Iowa Gambling Task.

258 eted the N-back task of working memory and a gambling task.

259 sonance images of 56 human subjects during a gambling task.

260 mentary eye field (SEF) during an oculomotor gambling task.

261 accumbens neurons while subjects performed a gambling task.

262 al response to feedback information during a gambling task.

263 Men outperform women on the Iowa Gambling Task.

264 measure rCBF, after which they completed the Gambling Task.

265 lated to decision making, as assessed by the Gambling Task.

266 ealthy adults had similar performance on the Gambling Task.

267 risk-aversion attitudes expressed during the gambling task.

268 hy young individuals engaged in a sequential gambling task.

269 but normal activation levels for a monetary gambling task.

270 ion making using the rat version of the Iowa gambling task.

271 rature on expertise acquisition and the Iowa Gambling Task.

272 and healthy controls (6 women) performing a gambling task.

273 cision-making performance on a modified Iowa Gambling Task.

274 striatal dopamine release to incentive cues, gambling tasks and reward prediction, and possible inhib

275 se data indicate that near-misses invigorate gambling through the anomalous recruitment of reward cir

276 Gambling to recover losses is a common gaming behavior.

277 own by the recent allocation of pathological gambling to this category in DSM-5.

278 differences existed between the non-problem gambling twins and their problem or pathological gamblin

279 ith PG (n = 10) reported mean +/- SD greater gambling urges after viewing gambling scenarios vs contr

280 n with PG, gambling cue presentation elicits gambling urges and leads to a temporally dynamic pattern

281 n the neural correlates of drug cravings and gambling urges in CD and PG.

282 Gambling urges in pathological gambling (PG) often immed

283 ed understanding of the neural correlates of gambling urges in PG would advance our understanding of

284 videos, and PG participants reporting strong gambling urges to gambling videos.

285 in reversal-learning tasks and more complex 'gambling' variants.

286 vated for cocaine videos in CD participants, gambling videos in PG participants, and sad videos in co

287 ticipants reporting strong gambling urges to gambling videos.

288 G participants showed increased responses to gambling videos.

289 nterior cingulate during the final period of gambling videotape viewing, corresponding to the present

290 Problem gambling was also associated with Multidimensional Perso

291 Main Outcome Measure Disordered gambling was defined based on lifetime DSM-IV PG symptom

292 personality profile associated with problem gambling was similar to the profiles associated with alc

293 l differences in reasons for and patterns of gambling were observed among the 3 groups of gamblers.

294 ndred seven persons with DSM-IV pathological gambling were randomly assigned to receive nalmefene (25

295 e Compulsive Scale Modified for Pathological Gambling) were analyzed by using a linear mixed-effects

296 ion was phrased in terms of gains and toward gambling when the decision was phrased in terms of losse

297 ng in the stop-signal paradigm reduces risky gambling when the training and gambling task are separat

298 DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling, when operationalized into questions, demonstra

299 that they are dysfunctional in pathological gambling with poor self-control, we studied gamblers wit

300 therapy, compulsive buying and pathological gambling, with eight patients exhibiting more than one i