Cited by 67Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Dissociation of attention in learning and action: effects of lesions of the amygdala central nucleus, medial prefrontal cortex, and posterior parietal cortex

Open access
Maddux, Jean-Marie, Kerfoot, Erin C., Chatterjee, Souvik, Holland, Peter C.·2007·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Many associative learning theories assert that the predictive accuracy of events affects the allocation of attention to them. More reliable predictors of future events are usually more likely to control action based on past learning, but less reliable predictors are often more likely to capture attention when new information is acquired. Previous studies showed that a circuit including the amygdala central nucleus (CEA) and the cholinergic substantia innominata/nucleus basalis magnocellularis (SI/nBM) is important for both sustained attention guiding action in a five-choice serial reaction time (5CSRT) task and for enhanced new learning about less predictive cues in a serial conditioning task. In this study, the authors found that lesions of the cholinergic afferents of the medial prefrontal cortex interfered with 5CSRT performance but not with surprise-induced enhancement of learning, whereas lesions of cholinergic afferents of posterior parietal cortex impaired the latter effects but did not affect 5CSRT performance. CEA lesions impaired performance in both tasks. These results are consistent with the view that CEA affects these distinct aspects of attention by influencing the activity of separate, specialized cortical regions via modulation of SI/nBM.

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 · 10.1037/0735-7044.121.1.63

Cites

84 of 84 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?

  • Task-related and exploratory attention rely on separate neural circuits involving the medial frontal cortex versus the substantia nigra, amygdala, and parietal lobe.

    “Neuropsychological studies in rats suggest that task-related and exploratory attention rely on separate neural circuits that involve, respectively, the medial frontal cortex (Maddux and Holland, 2011) versus the substantia nigra, amygdala and the parietal lobe (Maddux et al., 2007).”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Maddux et al., 2007

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Gritti I, Mainville L, Mancia M, Jones BE. GABAergic and other noncholinergic basal forebrain neurons, together with cholinergic neurons, project to the mesocortex and isocortex in the rat. Journal of Comparative Neurology. 1997;383:163–177. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Maddux JM, Chatterjee S, Kerfoot EC, Holland PC. Society for Neuroscience. 2005. Distinct roles for amygdala central nucleus, medial prefrontal cortex, and posterior parietal cortex in attention for learning and action. Abstract 411.16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Maddux JM, Holland PC. Society for Neuroscience. 2004. Lesions of medial prefrontal cortex interfere with rats' sensitivity to the predictive value of cues in a 5-choice serial reaction time task. Abstract 332.10. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maddux, J.-M., Kerfoot, E. C., Chatterjee, S., & Holland, P. C.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2007-02
Volume
121
Issue
1
Pages
63-79
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W2166376912
Cited by
67
References
84
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R37MH053667)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
attentional capture, associative learning, central amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex, posterior parietal cortex, nucleus basalis magnocellularis, substantia innominata, cholinergic afferents, serial reaction time task, lesion studies
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Attention, Behavior, Animal, Choice Behavior, Conditioning, Classical, Learning, Male, Parietal Lobe, Reaction Time, Prefrontal Cortex, 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