Berridge · Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews 1996 · narrative review · n=?

Food reward: brain substrates of wanting and liking.

Cited 1909 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review and theoretical framework based on animal neurobiology without systematic search criteria

PubMed 8622814 · doi:10.1016/0149-7634(95)00033-b · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

This narrative review evaluated behavioral and neurobiological literature regarding the psychological structure and neural substrates of food reward. The synthesis focused particularly on taste reactivity paradigms used to assess affective reactions to food in animal models, examining whether pleasure ('liking') and incentive motivation ('wanting') represent distinct neurofunctional processes.

What was found

The abstract reports no quantitative metrics or sample sizes. Conceptually, it outlines four primary conclusions: 1. Food reward contains dissociable components—'liking' (pleasure/palatability) and 'wanting' (appetite/incentive motivation)—that can be manipulated and measured independently. 2. Neural substrates differ: 'liking' involves opioid and GABA/benzodiazepine systems, the ventral pallidum, and brainstem primary gustatory relays; 'wanting' involves mesotelencephalic dopamine pathways, the nucleus accumbens, and the amygdala. 3. Neural processing of food reward is distributed and begins in the brainstem rather than being confined solely to the limbic forebrain. 4. Core 'liking' and 'wanting' processes can occur implicitly without subjective conscious awareness, meaning subjective reports may misrepresent or fail to register underlying reward processes.

Why it matters

This paper provides the foundational neurobiological distinction between hedonic pleasure ('liking') and motivational drive ('wanting'), fundamentally altering how reward processing, obesity, and addiction are conceptualized.

Limits

The abstract describes a qualitative, narrative synthesis without systematic search criteria, meta-analytic pooling, or quantitative effect sizes. The framework relies substantially on animal taste-reactivity models and invasive neurocircuitry manipulations, which may not directly map to complex human conscious experience or eating behavior.

Cited by