Cited by 314Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorMemory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Disconnection of the anterior cingulate cortex and nucleus accumbens core impairs Pavlovian approach behavior: further evidence for limbic cortical–ventral striatopallidal systems

Parkinson, John A., Willoughby, Pamela J., Robbins, Trevor W., Everitt, Barry J.·2000·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

The nucleus accumbens (NAcc) has been implicated in a variety of forms of reward-related learning, reflecting its anatomical connections with limbic cortical structures. After confirming that excitotoxic lesions of the anterior cingulate cortex (Ant Cing) impaired the acquisition of appetitive Pavlovian conditioning in an autoshaping procedure, the effects of excitotoxic lesions to the NAcc core or shell on autoshaping were also assessed. Only selective core lesions impaired Pavlovian approach. A subsequent experiment studied the effects of a disconnection of the Ant Cing and NAcc core, using an asymmetric lesion procedure, to determine whether these structures interact sequentially as part of a limbic corticostriatal system. Such lesioned rats were also significantly impaired relative to controls at autoshaping. These results demonstrate that the NAcc core and Ant Cing are "nodes" of a corticostriatal circuit involved in stimulus-reward learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0735-7044.114.1.42

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Selective excitotoxic lesions of the medial shell did not disrupt Pavlovian procedural learning in which approach responses were elicited by the presentation of conditioned stimuli paired with food.

    “Selective excitotoxic lesions of the medial shell did not disrupt Pavlovian procedural learning in which approach responses were elicited by the presentation of conditioned stimuli paired with food (Parkinson et al., 2000; Corbit et al., 2001; Hall et al., 2001).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 102 · Cited by 314

Authors
Parkinson, J. A., Willoughby, P. J., Robbins, T. W., & Everitt, B. J.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2000
Volume
114
Issue
1
Pages
42-63
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W2084246999
Cited by
314
References
102
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
anterior cingulate cortex, nucleus accumbens core, nucleus accumbens shell, autoshaping, corticostriatal circuits, excitotoxic lesions, reward learning
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain Mapping, Conditioning, Classical, Corpus Striatum, Globus Pallidus, Gyrus Cinguli, Limbic System, Male, Motivation, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Nucleus Accumbens, 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