Abstract
The role of the prefrontal cortex was studied in an active selection situation in which dogs had to choose one of two feeders, with changes in the quality and probability of the reinforcement provided in one of the feeders. The study was performed in two stages. Before surgery, animals were trained to place themselves on a start area during the interstimulus interval. Dogs were presented with a conditioned stimulus for investigation of the sequence of selection of feeders with identical reinforcements. After bilateral extirpation of the prefrontal areas (the proreal gyrus), dogs continuously ran from one feeder to the other during the interstimulus period. In response to the conditioned stimulus, the animals repeated the reaction of selecting the same feeder on many occasions during the first few (7–9) days. When there was a conflict between the probability and quality of reinforcement, the dogs came to prefer the feeder with the greater reinforcement quality despite its lower probability of presentation. In our experiments, operated animals presented with food at probabilities of 30% and 100% performed feeder selections with different probabilities. One of the functions of the prefrontal cortex in intact animals would appear to be to support the reaction of selecting the greater probability of reinforcement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
O. S. Adrianov and T. A. Mering, Atlas of the Dog Brain [in Russian], Medgiz, Moscow (1959).
O. S. Adrianov and L. N. Molodkina, “A measure of elementary evaluative activity in lobectomized and intact dogs,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 23, No.3, 545–551 (1973).
A. S. Batuev, Evolution of the Frontal Lobes and the Integrative Activity of the Brain [in Russian], Meditsina, Moscow (1973).
A. S. Batuev, G. P. Dem’yanenko, A. A. Orlov, and V. I. Shefer, Neuronal Mechanisms of the Conscious Monkey Brain [in Russian], Nauka, Leningrad (1988).
V. S. Genes, Some Simple Methods for the Cybernetic Processing of Data from Diagnostic and Physiological Experiments [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1967).
A. I. Karamyan and I. I. Malyukova, “Characteristics of the storage of traces of conditioned responses in different vertebrates,” in: Gagrskie Besedy. Neurophysiological Bases of Memory [in Russian], Metsniereba, Tbilisi (1979), Vol. 7, 231–242.
A. R. Luriya, The Bases of Neuropsychology [in Russian], Moscow State University Press, Moscow (1973).
N. N. Lyubimov, “Electrical responses in various cerebral cortex structures during the establishment of food-related conditioned reflexes to sound and light stimuli,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 15, No.4, 585–592 (1965).
I. V. Molyukova, “The role of the frontal and parietal associative areas of the neocortex in organizing complex purposive behavior in primates,” in: Associative Systems of the Brain [in Russian], Nauka, Leningrad (1985), pp. 241–244.
D. N. Menitskii and M. M. Khananashvili, “Changes in the components of emotional reactions in dogs in conditions of probabilistic reinforcement of conditioned stimuli and extinction of conditioned reflexes,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 19, No.5, 876–878 (1969).
D. N. Menitskii and V. V. Trubachev, Information and Problems of Higher Nervous Activity [in Russian], Meditsina, Leningrad (1974).
A. Ya. Mekhedova, “Evaluation of the probability of reinforcement in dogs after extirpation of the prefrontal cortex,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 24, No.3, 506–512 (1974).
E. I. Mukhin, “Neuropharmacological analysis of the dopaminergic, cholinergic, and GABAergic systems of the brain in organizing a reflex to time,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 34, No.4, 729–737 (1984).
T. L. Naneishvili, Neurophysiological Bases of Spatial Short-Term Memory [in Russian], Metsnereba, Tbilisi (1985).
M. L. Pigareva, Limbic Switching Mechanisms (the Hippocampus and Amygdala) [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1978).
L. A. Preobrazhenskaya, Emotion in the Operant Behavior of Animals [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1991).
L. A. Preobrazhenskaya, “Individual characteristics of dogs in the free selection of probability and quality of food reinforcement,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 47, No.3, 487–499 (1997).
K. Pribram, Languages of the Brain [in Russian], Progress, Moscow (1975).
L. P. Rudenko, “Individual characteristics of the behavior of dogs in conflicts between the probability and quality of reinforcement,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat., 38, No.3, 443–453 (1988).
P. V. Simonov, The Emotional Brain [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1981).
V. I. Syrenskii, Physiological Analysis of Several Types of Animal Behavior [in Russian], Meditsina, Leningrad (1967).
G. Walter, The Living Brain [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1966).
S. A. Chepurnov and N. E. Chepurnova, The Amygdaloid Complex of the Brain [in Russian], Moscow State University Press, Moscow (1981).
A. I. Shumilina, “The functional significance of the frontal areas of the cerebral cortex in conditioned reflex activity in dogs,” in: Questions of Higher Nervous Activity [in Russian], Academy of the Medical Sciences of the USSR Press, Moscow (1949), pp. 561–627.
A. S. Batuev, I. V. Malyukova, and I. M. Yonuakova, “Structural functional basis for frontal lobe participation on the organization of complex behavior in cats,” Brain Behav. Evol., 10, No.4–5, 290–306 (1974).
L. L. Baylis and D. Gaffan, “Amygdalectomy and ventromedial prefrontal ablation produce similar deficits in food choice and in simple object discrimination learning for an unseen reward,” Exptl. Brain Res., 86, No.3, 617–622 (1991).
A. Bechara, H. Damasio, A. R. Damasio, and G. P. Lee, “Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making,” J. Neurosci., 19, No.13, 5473–5481 (1999).
A. Bechara, H. Damasio, D. Tranel, and S. W. Anderson, “Dissociation of working memory from decision-making within human prefrontal cortex,” J. Neurosci., 18, 428–437 (1998).
J. W. Fockert, G. Rees, Ch. D. Frith, and N. Lavie, “The role of working memory in visual selective attention,” Science, 291, No.2, 1803–1806 (2001).
J. Konorski, “Some hypotheses concerning the functional organization of prefrontal cortex,” Acta Neurobiol. Exp., 32, No.2, 595–613 (1972).
W. Lawicka, “Physiological mechanism of delayed reactions. Delayed reactions in dogs and cats to directional stimuli,” Acta Biol. Exp., 19, 199–219 (1959).
R. Levy and P. S. Goldman-Rakic, “Association of storage and processing functions in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the nonhuman primate,” J. Neurosci., 19, No.12, 5149–5158 (1999).
S. Mobini, S. Body, M. Y. However, C. M. Bradshaw, E. Szabadi, J. F. Deakin, and I. M. Anderson, “Effects of lesions of the orbitofrontal cortex on sensitivity to delayed and probabilistic reinforcement,” Psychopharmacology (Berl.), 160, No.3, 290–298 (2002).
G. Rainer, S. C. Rao, and E. K. Miller, “Prospective coding for objects in primate prefrontal cortex,” J. Neurosci., 19, No.13, 5493–5505 (1999).
R. D. Rogers, A. M. Owen, H. C. Middleton, E. J. Williams, I. D. Pickard, B. J. Sahakian, and T. W. Robins, “Choosing between small, likely rewards and large, unlikely rewards activates inferior and orbital prefrontal cortex,” J. Neurosci., 10 (19), No. 5, 9029–9038 (1999).
P. Stevens, “Probability discrimination learning in hippocampectomized rats,” Physiol. Behav., 10, No.6, 1023–1027 (1973).
G. D. Steinhauer, “Preference for predictable small rewards over unpredictable larger rewards,” Psychol. Rep., 54, No.2, 467–471 (1984).
S. J. Thorp, E. T. Rools, and S. Maddison, “The orbitofrontal cortex: neuronal activity in the behaving monkey,” Exptl. Brain Res., 49, No.1, 99–115 (1983).
L. Tremblay and W. Schulz, “Relative reward preference in primate orbitofrontal cortex,” Nature, 398, 704–708 (1999).
M. Watanabe, “Reward expectancy in primate prefrontal neurons,” Nature, 382, No.6592, 629–632 (1996).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Translated from Zhurnal Vysshei Nervnoi Deyatel’nosti, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 409–419, May–June, 2004.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Preobrazhenskaya, L.A., Ioffe, M.E. & Mats, V.N. The effects of the quality and probability of reinforcement on feeder selection by lobectomized dogs. Neurosci Behav Physiol 35, 525–534 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-005-0088-z
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-005-0088-z