Cited by 322Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Predictive Neural Coding of Reward Preference Involves Dissociable Responses in Human Ventral Midbrain and Ventral Striatum

Open access
O'Doherty, John P., Buchanan, Tony W., Seymour, Ben, Dolan, Raymond J.·2006·Neuron

Abstract

Food preferences are acquired through experience and can exert strong influence on choice behavior. In order to choose which food to consume, it is necessary to maintain a predictive representation of the subjective value of the associated food stimulus. Here, we explore the neural mechanisms by which such predictive representations are learned through classical conditioning. Human subjects were scanned using fMRI while learning associations between arbitrary visual stimuli and subsequent delivery of one of five different food flavors. Using a temporal difference algorithm to model learning, we found predictive responses in the ventral midbrain and a part of ventral striatum (ventral putamen) that were related directly to subjects' actual behavioral preferences. These brain structures demonstrated divergent response profiles, with the ventral midbrain showing a linear response profile with preference, and the ventral striatum a bivalent response. These results provide insight into the neural mechanisms underlying human preference behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.11.014

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To make a choice, the brain uses representations of reward-expectancy and effort/risk requirement from prior experiences to optimize cost/benefit.

    “Research suggests that to make this choice, the brain uses representations of reward-expectancy and effort/risk requirement from prior experiences to optimize cost/benefit”

    From Food reward, hyperphagia, and obesity (2011) · cites this paper as [118]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
O'Doherty, J. P., Buchanan, T. W., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
157-166
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170349865
Cited by
322
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 17
FWCI
10.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
food preferences, reward prediction, predictive coding, ventral midbrain, ventral striatum, ventral putamen, classical conditioning, temporal difference learning, subjective value, choice behavior
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Cerebral Cortex, Corpus Striatum, Cues, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mesencephalon, Models, Neurological, Pupil, Reaction Time, Reward, Taste, Linear Models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review