Cited by 213Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural MechanismsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Contributions of the Amygdala to Reward Expectancy and Choice Signals in Human Prefrontal Cortex

Open access
Hampton, Alan N., Adolphs, Ralph, Tyszka, J. Michael, O'Doherty, John P.·2007·Neuron

Abstract

The prefrontal cortex (PFC) receives substantial anatomical input from the amygdala, and these two structures have long been implicated in reward-related learning and decision making. Yet little is known about how these regions interact, especially in humans. We investigated the contribution of the amygdala to reward-related signals in PFC by scanning two rare subjects with focal bilateral amygdala lesions using fMRI. The subjects performed a reversal learning task in which they first had to learn which of two choices was the more rewarding, and then flexibly switch their choices when contingencies changed. Compared with healthy controls, both amygdala lesion subjects showed a profound change in ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) activity associated with reward expectation and behavioral choice. These findings support a critical role for the human amygdala in establishing expected reward representations in PFC, which in turn may be used to guide behavioral choice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.07.022

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • The amygdala's role in mediating loss aversion may be analogous to its role in modulating caudate- or hippocampal-dependent memory and choice in reversal tasks.

    “In this regard, the amygdala’s role in mediating loss aversion may be analogous to its role in modulating caudate- or hippocampal-dependent memory (31), and choice in reversal tasks (20).”

    From Amygdala damage eliminates monetary loss aversion (2010) · cites this paper as [20]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hampton, A. N., Adolphs, R., Tyszka, J. M., & O'Doherty, J. P.
Affiliations
California Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-08
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
545-555
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020628123
Cited by
213
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
amygdala, prefrontal cortex, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, reward anticipation, behavioral choice, reversal learning, amygdala lesions, decision-making, reward learning
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Attention, Brain Injuries, Brain Mapping, Choice Behavior, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Reward, Time Factors, Prefrontal Cortex

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