31 research outputs found
Reward-Related Dorsal Striatal Activity Differences between Former and Current Cocaine Dependent Individuals during an Interactive Competitive Game
Cocaine addiction is characterized by impulsivity, impaired social relationships, and abnormal mesocorticolimbic reward processing, but their interrelationships relative to stages of cocaine addiction are unclear. We assessed blood-oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) signal in ventral and dorsal striatum during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in current (CCD; n = 30) and former (FCD; n = 28) cocaine dependent subjects as well as healthy control (HC; n = 31) subjects while playing an interactive competitive Domino game involving risk-taking and reward/punishment processing. Out-of-scanner impulsivity-related measures were also collected. Although both FCD and CCD subjects scored significantly higher on impulsivity-related measures than did HC subjects, only FCD subjects had differences in striatal activation, specifically showing hypoactivation during their response to gains versus losses in right dorsal caudate, a brain region linked to habituation, cocaine craving and addiction maintenance. Right caudate activity in FCD subjects also correlated negatively with impulsivity-related measures of self-reported compulsivity and sensitivity to reward. These findings suggest that remitted cocaine dependence is associated with striatal dysfunction during social reward processing in a manner linked to compulsivity and reward sensitivity measures. Future research should investigate the extent to which such differences might reflect underlying vulnerabilities linked to cocaine-using propensities (e.g., relapses)
Volcker's Covered Funds Rule and Trans-Statutory Cross References: Securities Regulation in the Service of Banking Law
Time to Rethink the Right of Publicity by Distinguishing between Associational-Based and Confusion-Based Relationships?
The BAWAG Banking Scandal: How Over a Billion in Concealed Currency Trading Losses Caught Up with an Austrian Bank Almost a Decade Later
Unbundling Freedom in the Sharing Economy
Courts and scholars point to the sharing economy as the most recent proof that our labor amp employment infrastructure is obsolete because it rests on a narrow and outmoded idea ”namely that only workers subjected to direct personalized control by their employers need workrelated protections and benefits Since they diagnose the problem as being our system\u27s emphasis on control these critics have long called for reducing or eliminating the primacy of the control test in classifying workers as either protected employees or unprotected independent contractors Despite these persistent criticisms however the concept of control has been remarkably sticky in scholarly and judicial circlesbrbrThis Article argues that critics have misdiagnosed the reason why the control test is an unsatisfying method of classifying workers and dispensing workrelated safeguards Controlbased analysis is faulty because it only captures one of the two conflicting ways in which workers scholars and decisionmakers think about freedom at work One of these ways freedom as noninterference is adequately captured by the control test The other freedom as nondomination is not The tension between these two conceptions of freedom both deeply entrenched in American culture explains why the concept of control has been both faulty and sticky when it comes to worker classification brbrDrawing on a firstofitskind body of ethnographic fieldwork among workers and policymakers across several sharing economy industries this Article begins by showing how workers themselves conceptualize freedom as both noninterference and nondomination It then goes on to show that both these conceptualizations of freedom also exist in case law and statutory law pertaining to work In doing so the Article demonstrates that there is no great divide between work law and work practices and that if anything the problem is that classification doctrine reflects and reinforces an irresolvable tension in the way lay and legal actors think about freedom at wor