Cited by 74Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Risk-Responsive Orbitofrontal Neurons Track Acquired Salience

Open access
Ogawa, Masaaki, van der Meer, Matthijs A.A., Esber, Guillem R., Cerri, Domenic H., Stalnaker, Thomas A., Schoenbaum, Geoffrey·2013·Neuron

Abstract

Decision making is impacted by uncertainty and risk (i.e., variance). Activity in the orbitofrontal cortex, an area implicated in decision making, covaries with these quantities. However, this activity could reflect the heightened salience of situations in which multiple outcomes-reward and reward omission-are expected. To resolve these accounts, rats were trained to respond to cues predicting 100%, 67%, 33%, or 0% reward. Consistent with prior reports, some orbitofrontal neurons fired differently in anticipation of uncertain (33% and 67%) versus certain (100% and 0%) reward. However, over 90% of these neurons also fired differently prior to 100% versus 0% reward (or baseline) or prior to 33% versus 67% reward. These responses are inconsistent with risk but fit well with the representation of acquired salience linked to the sum of cue-outcome and cue-no-outcome associative strengths. These results expand our understanding of how the orbitofrontal cortex might regulate learning and behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.11.006

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ogawa, M., van der Meer, M. A. A., Esber, G. R., Cerri, D. H., Stalnaker, T. A., & Schoenbaum, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (US)
Corresponding author
  • Ogawa, Masaaki
  • Schoenbaum, Geoffrey
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
77
Issue
2
Pages
251-258
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136945089
Cited by
74
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6
FWCI
6.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (Z99 DA999999)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA015718, R21DA027742, ZIADA000587)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
orbitofrontal cortex, risk, uncertainty, salience, single-unit activity, reward prediction, decision-making, reward omission, associative learning, cue-outcome associations, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Cues, Decision Making, Frontal Lobe, Male, Neurons, Reward, Risk Factors, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats

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