↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Size and Delay on Neural Activity in the Rat Limbic Corticostriatal System

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Impact of Size and Delay on Neural Activity in the Rat Limbic Corticostriatal System
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2011.00130
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew R. Roesch, Daniel W. Bryden

Abstract

A number of factors influence an animal's economic decisions. Two most commonly studied are the magnitude of and delay to reward. To investigate how these factors are represented in the firing rates of single neurons, we devised a behavioral task that independently manipulated the expected delay to and size of reward. Rats perceived the differently delayed and sized rewards as having different values and were more motivated under short delay and big-reward conditions than under long delay and small reward conditions as measured by percent choice, accuracy, and reaction time. Since the creation of this task, we have recorded from several different brain areas including, orbitofrontal cortex, striatum, amygdala, substantia nigra pars reticulata, and midbrain dopamine neurons. Here, we review and compare those data with a substantial focus on those areas that have been shown to be critical for performance on classic time discounting procedures and provide a potential mechanism by which they might interact when animals are deciding between differently delayed rewards. We found that most brain areas in the cortico-limbic circuit encode both the magnitude and delay to reward delivery in one form or another, but only a few encode them together at the single neuron level.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
France 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 18 33%
Psychology 13 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Engineering 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 8 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2011.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,067
of 11,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,802
of 190,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#52
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 190,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.