1980
DOI: 10.3758/bf03337466
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of the effects of medial frontal, dorsomedial thalamic, and combination lesions on discrimination and spontaneous alternation in the rat

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2002
2002

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While investigators generally offer several interpretations for the observed lesion-related behavioral changes (e.g., Means, Hunt, Whiteside, & Bates, 1973;Means, Huntley, Anderson, & Harrell, 1973), the statements that the mediodorsal nucleus has some kind of choice function (Weis & Means, 1980) and that lesions in it result in a reduced ability to initiate responses leading to the reward (Thompson, 1979;Vanderwolf, 1971) fit most of the outcomes of the above mentioned studies and agree with the results of our first experiment as well. The results of our Experiment 2 suggest, however, the existence of a consolidation or retrieval deficit, that is, a memory-related role of the mediodorsal nucleus (cf.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…While investigators generally offer several interpretations for the observed lesion-related behavioral changes (e.g., Means, Hunt, Whiteside, & Bates, 1973;Means, Huntley, Anderson, & Harrell, 1973), the statements that the mediodorsal nucleus has some kind of choice function (Weis & Means, 1980) and that lesions in it result in a reduced ability to initiate responses leading to the reward (Thompson, 1979;Vanderwolf, 1971) fit most of the outcomes of the above mentioned studies and agree with the results of our first experiment as well. The results of our Experiment 2 suggest, however, the existence of a consolidation or retrieval deficit, that is, a memory-related role of the mediodorsal nucleus (cf.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Deficits in acquisition or retention following lesions of the mediodorsal nucleus in rats, cats, and monkeys have been reported for a variety of tasks. Most frequently, delayed-response (Chow, 1954;Peters, Rosvold, & Mirsky, 1956;Schulman, 1964), delayed-alternation (Kessler & Markowitsch, 1981;Markowitsch, 1982;Peters et al, 1956), spontaneous alternation (Means, Harrell, Mayo, & Alexander, 1974;Weis & Means, 1980), and sensory discrimination tasks (Chow, 1954;Means, Huntley, Anderson, & Harrell, 1973;Peters et al, 1956;Schulman, 1964;Thompson, 1979;Waring & Means, 1976;Warren & Akert, 1960;Weis & Means, 1980) were used. While deficits were observed in all kinds of species and tasks, the degree of destruction of the mediodorsal nucleus appears to have the highest predictive value for a task-related impairment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such studies have focused almost exclusively on the MD thalamus, and have yielded equivocal results. For example, whereas some authors have reported impairments following MD thalamic lesions in tests of spontaneous and reinforced alternation (Weiss & Means, 1980; Vicedomini et al ., 1982), others have found no impairments on such tasks (Brito et al ., 1982; Green & Naranjo, 1986; Hunt & Aggleton, 1991, 1998; Neave et al ., 1993). Furthermore, in cases where positive results were obtained, it is difficult to determine the critical task factor.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, MDN lesions cause a mild, but significant, impairment in discriminative responding in a running wheel avoidance task, and also decrease training-related multiple-unit activity in MDN projection cortex (Gabriel et al 1989). Other discriminative/reversal deficits following MDN damage have also been reported (Weis and Means 1980;Staubli et al 1987;Lu and Slotnick 1990). Additionally, some investigators report that tests of spatial memory are sensitive to MDN damage (Means et al 1975;Kessler et al 1982;Stokes andBest 1988, 1990), although others report no effect on such tasks (Hunt and Aggleton 1991).…”
Section: Powell and Churchwellmentioning
confidence: 96%