Neuronal responses support a role for orbitofrontal cortex in cognitive set reconfiguration

Sleezer, Brianna J.; LoConte, Giuliana A.; Castagno, Meghan D.; Hayden, Benjamin Y.

doi:10.1101/082610

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Strategy switching depended only on the repetition or change of the strategy from one trial to the next one and not on the behavioral outcome. This aspect of the task design allowed a clear dissociation between switching and error signals, in contrast to previous neurophysiological studies in which the switch followed the absence of reward (Mansouri et al, 2006;Kamigaki et al, 2009;Yamada et al, 2010;Sleezer et al, 2017). In addition, we also note that the switch-related activity could not be explained by differences in visual responses, because both switch and nonswitch trials occurred in equal proportions after the presentation of stay and shift cues.…”

Section: Comparison With Previous Studiescontrasting

confidence: 63%

Neural Correlates of Strategy Switching in the Macaque Orbital Prefrontal Cortex

Fascianelli

Ferrucci

Tsujimoto³

et al. 2020

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We can adapt flexibly to environment changes and search for the most appropriate rule to a context. The orbital prefrontal cortex (PFo) has been associated with decision making, rule generation and maintenance, and more generally has been considered important for behavioral flexibility. To better understand the neural mechanisms underlying the flexible behavior, we studied the ability to generate a switching signal in monkey PFo when a strategy is changed. In the strategy task, we used a visual cue to instruct two male rhesus monkeys either to repeat their most recent choice (i.e., stay strategy) or to change it (i.e., shift strategy). To identify the strategy switching-related signal, we compared nonswitch and switch trials, which cued the same or a different strategy from the previous trial, respectively. We found that the switching-related signal emerged during the cue presentation and it was combined with the strategy signal in a subpopulation of cells. Moreover, the error analysis showed that the activity of the switch-related cells reflected whether the monkeys erroneously switched or not the strategy, rather than what was required for that trial. The function of the switching signal could be to prompt the use of different strategies when older strategies are no longer appropriate, conferring the ability to adapt flexibly to environmental changes. In our task, the switching signal might contribute to the implementation of the strategy cued, overcoming potential interference effects from the strategy previously cued. Our results support the idea that ascribes to PFo an important role for behavioral flexibility.

show abstract

Section: Comparison With Previous Studiescontrasting

confidence: 63%

Neural Correlates of Strategy Switching in the Macaque Orbital Prefrontal Cortex

Fascianelli

Ferrucci

Tsujimoto³

et al. 2020

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it is likely that there is some prioritisation of information going on, perhaps in something like a salience map that is maintained to guide future decisions (Itti and Koch, 2001). Indeed, recent research linking ostensibly value-related regions to switching processes provides suggestive evidence that the ideas of attentional switching and choice have a deep linkage (Birrell and Brown, 2000; Sleezer et al, 2017; Sleezer and Hayden, 2016; Blanchard et al, 2014)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice

Hayden

Moreno‐Bote

2018

Brain and Neuroscience Advances

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of recent studies point towards a new framework for the neural bases of economic choice. The principles of this framework include the idea that evaluation is limited to a single option within the focus of attention and that we accept or reject that option relative to the entire set of alternatives. Rejection leads attention to a new option, although it can later switch back to a previously rejected one. The option to which a neuron's firing rate refers is determined dynamically by attention and not stably by labelled lines. Value is always computed relative to the value of rejection. Comparison results not from explicit competition between discrete populations of neurons, but indirectly, as in a horse race, from the fact that the first option whose value crosses a threshold is selected. Consequently, comparison can occur within a single pool of neurons rather than by competition between two or more neuronal populations. The computations that constitute comparison thus occur at multiple levels, including premotor levels, simultaneously (i.e. the brain uses a distributed consensus), and not in discrete stages. This framework suggests a solution to a set of otherwise unresolved neuronal binding problems that result from the need to link options to values, comparisons to actions, and choices to outcomes.

show abstract

“…Overall, our results suggest one core function of OFC may be to generate an abstract regulatory signal to feed into a cascade of downstream structures that ultimately determine choice (Hunt and Hayden 2017; Balasubramani et al 2019; Yoo and Hayden, 2018). In this way, it may be similar to other regions, especially cingulate cortex but also striatal regions (Hillman and Bilkey 2010; Shenhav et al 2013; Sleezer et al, 2017; Sleezer et al, 2016). In the context of economic choice, this signal will resemble a value signal; in other cases, it will correlate with other relevant task variables.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Shared neuronal bases of inhibition and economic choice in orbitofrontal cortex

Balasubramani

Hayden

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic choice and inhibition are two important elements of our cognitive repertoires that may be closely related. We and others have noted that during economic choice, options are typically considered serially; this fact provides important constraints on our understanding of choice. Notably, asynchronous contemplation means that each individual option is subject to an accept-reject decision. We have proposed that these component accept-reject decisions may have some kinship with stopping decisions. One prediction of this idea is that stopping and choice may reflect similar neural processes occurring in overlapping brain circuits. To test the idea, we recorded neuronal activity in orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) Area 13 while macaques performed a stop signal task interleaved with a structurally matched choice task. Using neural network decoders, we find that OFC ensembles have overlapping codes for stopping and choice: the decoder that was only trained to identify accept vs. reject trials performed with higher efficiency even when tested on the stop trials. These results provide tentative support for the idea that mechanisms underlying inhibitory control and choice selection may be subject to theoretical unification.

show abstract

Neuronal responses support a role for orbitofrontal cortex in cognitive set reconfiguration

Cited by 6 publications

References 47 publications

Neural Correlates of Strategy Switching in the Macaque Orbital Prefrontal Cortex

Neural Correlates of Strategy Switching in the Macaque Orbital Prefrontal Cortex

A neuronal theory of sequential economic choice

Shared neuronal bases of inhibition and economic choice in orbitofrontal cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About