Cited by 57Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorMemory and Neural Mechanisms

To be specific: The role of orbitofrontal cortex in signaling reward identity.

Open access
Howard, James D., Kahnt, Thorsten·2021·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

The orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) plays a prominent role in signaling reward expectations. Two important features of rewards are their value (how good they are) and their specific identity (what they are). Whereas research on OFC has traditionally focused on reward value, recent findings point toward a pivotal role of reward identity in understanding OFC signaling and its contribution to behavior. Here, we review work in rodents, nonhuman primates, and humans on how the OFC represents expectations about the identity of rewards, and how these signals contribute to outcome-guided behavior. Moreover, we summarize recent findings suggesting that specific reward expectations in OFC are learned and updated by means of identity errors in the dopaminergic midbrain. We conclude by discussing how OFC encoding of specific rewards complements recent proposals that this region represents a cognitive map of relevant task states, which forms the basis for model-based behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

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/bne0000455

Cites

87 of 87 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kamin LJ (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning. In Church RM & Campbell BA (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howard, J. D., & Kahnt, T.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2021-04
Volume
135
Issue
2
Pages
210-217
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W3139067400
Cited by
57
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC015426)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R03DA040668)
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, reward anticipation, reward value, dopaminergic midbrain, cognitive maps, task state
MeSH terms
Animals, Dopamine, Learning, Reward, Signal Transduction, 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