Effects of lesions of the amygdala central nucleus on autoshaped lever pressing

Chang, Stephen E.; Wheeler, Daniel S.; Holland, Peter C.

doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2012.02.029

Cited by 33 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As in previous autoshaping studies [5,6], peak lever press responding was observed during the 2 nd 5 s of CS presentations. Table 1 presents the mean lever press rate and percentage of trials with a lever press of OFC- and sham-lesioned rats during the first and second 5 s intervals of CS+ and CS- presentations, averaged over the entire training period.…”

supporting

confidence: 74%

Effects of orbitofrontal cortex lesions on autoshaped lever pressing and reversal learning

Chang

2014

Behavioural Brain Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A cue associated with a rewarding event can trigger behavior towards the cue itself due to the cue acquiring incentive value through its pairing with the rewarding outcome (i.e., sign-tracking). For example, rats will approach, press, and attempt to “consume” a retractable lever conditioned stimulus (CS) that signals delivery of a food unconditioned stimulus (US). Attending to food-predictive CSs is important when seeking out food, and it is just as important to be able to modify one’s behavior when the relationships between CSs and USs are changed. Using a discriminative autoshaping procedure with lever CSs, the present study investigated the effects of orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) lesions on sign-tracking and reversal learning. Insertion of one lever was followed by sucrose delivery upon retraction, and insertion of another lever was followed by nothing. After the acquisition phase, the contingencies between the levers and outcomes were reversed. Bilateral OFC lesions had no effect on the acquisition of sign-tracking. However, OFC-lesioned rats showed substantial deficits in acquiring sign-tracking compared to sham-lesioned rats once the stimulus-outcome contingencies were reversed. Over the course of reversal learning, OFC-lesioned rats were able to reach comparable levels of sign-tracking as sham-lesioned rats. These findings suggest that OFC is not necessary for the ability of a CS to acquire incentive value and provide more evidence that OFC is critical for modifying behavior appropriately following a change in stimulus-outcome contingencies

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 74%

Effects of orbitofrontal cortex lesions on autoshaped lever pressing and reversal learning

Chang

2014

Behavioural Brain Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The CeN is required to learn from (negative) reward-prediction error (Holland and Gallagher 1993;Holland et al 2001;Haney et al 2010) and CeN-SNc-projecting neurons will become activated after learning by reward-prediction error, suggesting that communication between these structures relates to reward-prediction errormediated learning (Lee et al 2010). An intact CeN is also required for the acquisition of conditioned-orienting (Gallagher et al 1990) and sign-tracking responding (Parkinson et al 2000), but is not required for more specific consummatory CRs (Chang et al 2012). Similarly, the CeN is required for general, but not outcome-specific PIT (Hall et al 2001;Holland and Gallagher 2003;Corbit and Balleine 2005).…”

Section: Circuitry For General Motivational Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

The Origins and Organization of Vertebrate Pavlovian Conditioning

Fanselow

Wassum

2015

Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pavlovian conditioning is the process by which we learn relationships between stimuli and thus constitutes a basic building block for how the brain constructs representations of the world. We first review the major concepts of Pavlovian conditioning and point out many of the pervasive misunderstandings about just what conditioning is. This brings us to a modern redefinition of conditioning as the process whereby experience with a conditional relationship between stimuli bestows these stimuli with the ability to promote adaptive behavior patterns that did not occur before the experience. Working from this framework, we provide an in-depth analysis of two examples, fear conditioning and food-based appetitive conditioning, which include a description of the only partially overlapping neural circuitry of each. We also describe how these circuits promote the basic characteristics that define Pavlovian conditioning, such as error-correction-driven regulation of learning.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, we suggest the maintenance of approach behaviors are best captured by incentive motivation concepts, which suggest that such sign-tracking CRs occur because of a motivational attraction to the CS+, a motivation that can become decoupled from trial-to-trial variations in reward outcome. The fact that rats persisted in engaging with the CS+ instead of favoring the food cup lends further support to the argument here that the incentive value of the CS+ remained high.In the brain, limbic circuits have been implicated in signtracking (Cardinal et al 2002;Mahler and Berridge 2009;Flagel et al 2010;Chang et al 2012a Chang et al ,b, 2015Saunders and Robinson 2012;Chang and Holland 2013). A fruitful effort would be to resolve the neural mechanisms by which rats adaptively modify their responses when CS -CR -US conditions change but CS incentive salience remains strong.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the brain, limbic circuits have been implicated in signtracking (Cardinal et al 2002;Mahler and Berridge 2009;Flagel et al 2010;Chang et al 2012a Chang et al ,b, 2015Saunders and Robinson 2012;Chang and Holland 2013). A fruitful effort would be to resolve the neural mechanisms by which rats adaptively modify their responses when CS -CR -US conditions change but CS incentive salience remains strong.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An omission procedure reorganizes the microstructure of sign-tracking while preserving incentive salience

Chang

Smith

2016

Learn. Mem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appetitive sign-tracking, in which reward-paired cues elicit approach that can result in cue interaction, demonstrates how cues acquire motivational value. For example, rats will approach and subsequently interact with a lever insertion cue that signals food delivery upon its retraction. However, lever deflections are rapidly reduced once rats are trained on an omission schedule in which lever interactions cancel food delivery. Here we evaluated the change in sign-tracking response topography in rats exposed to such an omission procedure. Lever deflections dropped precipitously when they canceled reward. However, rats that were on an omission schedule continued to approach, sniff, and contact the lever without pressing it, and did so at comparable rates to rats that were not under an omission schedule. Thus, sign-tracking was maintained, albeit in a different manner, following omission. Such findings show that the motivational attraction to reward cues can be expressed with remarkable persistence and flexibility.[Supplemental material is available for this article.]Appetitive sign-tracking is a phenomenon in which a rewardpaired cue elicits approach that can result in cue interaction (Brown and Jenkins 1968;Jenkins and Moore 1973;Hearst and Jenkins 1974;Boakes 1977). For example, rats will acquire a conditioned response (CR) in which they will approach, contact, and bite a lever conditioned stimulus (CS) that signals the delivery of a food unconditioned stimulus (US). Sign-tracking is a key model for studying behavioral and neural mechanisms of normal and excessive motivational attraction to reward-paired stimuli (Lajoie and Bindra 1976;Berridge 2004;Tomie et al. 2008;Flagel et al. 2010;Robinson and Berridge 2013;Huys et al. 2014;Robinson et al. 2014).Negative automaintenance, in which a lever press cancels reward, has been used to show that sign-tracking can be markedly sensitive to instrumental contingency changes (Williams and Williams 1969;Stiers and Silberberg 1974;Locurto et al. 1976), suggesting a sensitivity to response-reward associations (Skinner 1992). For example, Locurto et al. (1976) have found that lever contacts after sign-tracking are markedly reduced in rats moved to an omission schedule, with similar rates of lever contacts compared with rats exposed to extinction or random cue/reward delivery. However, typically, sign-tracking does not decline to zero (Atnip 1977;Eldridge and Pear 1987;Schwartz and Williams 1972a;Stiers and Silberberg 1974;Woodard et al. 1974), suggesting some motivational persistence as well. Thus, sign-tracking CRs may be partly sensitive to contingency and partly under control of motivational forces that promote its persistence.Generally, it remains unclear to what quantitative extent the motivational attraction to the CS actually declines along with the declining CR when it cancels reward. Is the incentive value of the CS retained but masked by reduced lever pressing measures, or is it reduced as well?To clarify this issue, we studied the response topography of sign-trac...

show abstract

Effects of lesions of the amygdala central nucleus on autoshaped lever pressing

Cited by 33 publications

References 37 publications

Effects of orbitofrontal cortex lesions on autoshaped lever pressing and reversal learning

Effects of orbitofrontal cortex lesions on autoshaped lever pressing and reversal learning

The Origins and Organization of Vertebrate Pavlovian Conditioning

An omission procedure reorganizes the microstructure of sign-tracking while preserving incentive salience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About