Preference judgements involve a network of structures within frontal, cingulate and insula cortices

Chaudhry, Amir; Parkinson, John A.; Hinton, Elanor C.; Owen, Adrian M.; Roberts, Angela

doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06646.x

Cited by 44 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The level of understanding about the functional roles of other nearby regions, such as the arcuate cortex as well as the dorsal and ventral premotor areas, is becoming even more clear as a result of several recent neurophysiological and neuroanatomical studies [37,44,46,61,157–159,200]. Moreover, behavioral processes such as motivation, will, drive, and emotion that play a contributing role in motor activities is beginning to unfold with the development of functional imaging techniques [18,24,32,64,104,171]. Therefore it is pertinent to know how the precentral and premotor areas relate structurally to the dorsal and medial regions implicated in the cortical motor system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytoarchitecture and cortical connections of the anterior cingulate and adjacent somatomotor fields in the rhesus monkey

Morecraft

Stilwell-Morecraft

Cipolloni

et al. 2012

Brain Research Bulletin

172

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cytoarchitecture and cortical connections of the anterior cingulate, medial and dorsal premotor, and precentral region are investigated using the Nissl and NeuN staining method and the fluorescent retrodgrade tract tracing technique. There is a gradual stepwise laminar change in the cytoarchitectonic organization from the proisocortical anterior cingulate region, through the lower and upper banks of the cingulate sulcus, to the dorsolateral isocortical premotor and precentral motor regions of the frontal lobe. These changes are characterized by a gradational emphasis on the lower stratum layers (V and VI) in the proisocortical cingulate region to the upper stratum layers (II and III) in the premotor and precentral motor region. This is accompanied by a progressive widening of layers III and VI, a poorly delineated border between layers III and V and a sequential increase in the size of layer V neurons culminating in the presense of giant Betz cells in the precentral motor region. The overall patterns of corticocortical connections paralleled the sequential changes in cytoarchitectonic organization. The proisocortical areas have connections with cingulate motor, supplementary motor, premotor and precentral motor areas on the one hand and have widespread connections with the frontal, parietal, temporal and multimodal association cortex and limbic regions on the other. The dorsal premotor areas have connections with the proisocortical areas including cingulate motor areas and supplementary motor area on the one hand, and premotor and precentral motor cortex on the other. Additionally, this region has significant connections with posterior parietal cortex and limited connections with prefrontal, limbic and multimodal regions. The precentral motor cortex also has connections with the proisocortical areas and premotor areas. Its other connections are limited to the somatosensory regions of the parietal lobe. Since the isocortical motor areas on the dorsal convexity mediate voluntary motor function, their close connectional relationship with the cingulate areas form a pivitol limbic-motor interface that could provide critical sources of cognitive, emotional and motivational influence on complex motor function.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytoarchitecture and cortical connections of the anterior cingulate and adjacent somatomotor fields in the rhesus monkey

Morecraft

Stilwell-Morecraft

Cipolloni

et al. 2012

Brain Research Bulletin

172

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Possible explanations have been discussed elsewhere and include differences between species, differences in behavioral tasks, susceptibility artifacts in fMRI, and the heterogeneous nature of neuronal responses in OFC (Wallis, 2012). In addition to these considerations, it is worth noting that several imaging studies did in fact find value signals in the OFC (Arana et al, 2003; Chaudhry et al, 2009; Gottfried et al, 2003; Hare et al, 2008). These include in particular recent studies that focused on signals associated with individual goods or options (Howard et al, 2015; Howard and Kahnt, 2017; Klein-Flugge et al, 2013).…”

Section: Contributions Of Other Brain Regionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orbitofrontal Cortex: A Neural Circuit for Economic Decisions

Padoa-Schioppa

Conen

2017

Neuron

261

180

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic choice behavior entails the computation and comparison of subjective values. A central contribution of neuroeconomics has been to show that subjective values are represented explicitly at the neuronal level. With this result at hand, the field has increasingly focused on the difficult question of where in the brain and how exactly subjective values are compared to make a decision. Here we review a broad range of experimental and theoretical results suggesting that good-based decisions are generated in a neural circuit within the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). The main lines of evidence supporting this proposal include the fact that goal-directed behavior is specifically disrupted by OFC lesions, the fact that different groups of neurons in this area encode the input and the output of the decision process, the fact that activity fluctuations in each of these cell groups correlate with choice variability, and the fact that these groups of neurons are computationally sufficient to generate decisions. Results from other brain regions are consistent with the idea that good-based decisions take place in OFC, and indicate that value signals inform a variety of mental functions. We also contrast the present proposal with other leading models for the neural mechanisms of economic decisions. Finally, we indicate open questions and suggest possible directions for future research.

show abstract

“…In the preference judgment task, participants are required to make a decision based on personal criteria; the judgment is not based on external criteria. Preference judgments of many kinds have been used in previous studies: preference judgment for food (Arana et al, 2003; Paulus and Frank, 2003; Hare et al, 2009; Piech et al, 2009; Linder et al, 2010), products (Knutson et al, 2007, 2008), brands (Santos et al, 2011), faces (Kim et al, 2007; Chen et al, 2010), holiday options (Chaudhry et al, 2009), paintings (Jarcho et al, 2011), political beliefs (Zamboni et al, 2009), occupations (Nakao et al, 2009a, 2010c), task types (Forstmann et al, 2006), agencies of choice (Forstmann et al, 2008), shapes (Jacobsen et al, 2006), and colors (Goldberg and Podell, 1999, 2000; Johnson et al, 2005). …”

Section: Review Of Studies Of Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinction between Externally vs. Internally Guided Decision-Making: Operational Differences, Meta-Analytical Comparisons and Their Theoretical Implications

Nakao¹,

Ohira²,

Northoff³

2012

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most experimental studies of decision-making have specifically examined situations in which a single less-predictable correct answer exists (externally guided decision-making under uncertainty). Along with such externally guided decision-making, there are instances of decision-making in which no correct answer based on external circumstances is available for the subject (internally guided decision-making). Such decisions are usually made in the context of moral decision-making as well as in preference judgment, where the answer depends on the subject’s own, i.e., internal, preferences rather than on external, i.e., circumstantial, criteria. The neuronal and psychological mechanisms that allow guidance of decisions based on more internally oriented criteria in the absence of external ones remain unclear. This study was undertaken to compare decision-making of these two kinds empirically and theoretically. First, we reviewed studies of decision-making to clarify experimental–operational differences between externally guided and internally guided decision-making. Second, using multi-level kernel density analysis, a whole-brain-based quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies was performed. Our meta-analysis revealed that the neural network used predominantly for internally guided decision-making differs from that for externally guided decision-making under uncertainty. This result suggests that studying only externally guided decision-making under uncertainty is insufficient to account for decision-making processes in the brain. Finally, based on the review and results of the meta-analysis, we discuss the differences and relations between decision-making of these two types in terms of their operational, neuronal, and theoretical characteristics.

show abstract

Preference judgements involve a network of structures within frontal, cingulate and insula cortices

Cited by 44 publications

References 38 publications

Cytoarchitecture and cortical connections of the anterior cingulate and adjacent somatomotor fields in the rhesus monkey

Cytoarchitecture and cortical connections of the anterior cingulate and adjacent somatomotor fields in the rhesus monkey

Orbitofrontal Cortex: A Neural Circuit for Economic Decisions

Distinction between Externally vs. Internally Guided Decision-Making: Operational Differences, Meta-Analytical Comparisons and Their Theoretical Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About