Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Histological results. A, B, Photomicrographs of representative sham (A) and OFC lesions (B). C–E, Schematic representation of minimum and maximum extent of OFC damage in each of the three lesion groups. C and D refer, respectively, to groups pre-OFC and post-OFC in Experiment 1. E refers to the lesioned group in Experiment 2.
- Figure 2.
Effect of OFC lesions on the acquisition of pavlovian conditioned approach and instrumental lever pressing. A, Mean number of conditioned magazine entries performed per minute (±SEM) across successive two-session blocks of pavlovian training, plotted as the difference in responding during CS and pre-CS periods (CS minus pre-CS). B, Mean lever presses performed per minute (±SEM) across sessions of instrumental training, blocked according to training contingency.
- Figure 3.
Effect of OFC lesions on sensitivity of instrumental performance to outcome devaluation. Mean lever presses per minute (+ SEM) in the extinction test. The response paired with the devalued outcome (Devalued) and the response paired with the other outcome (Other) are plotted separately.
- Figure 4.
Effect of OFC lesions on pavlovian-instrumental transfer. Mean lever presses per minute (+ SEM) during the pre-CS period (Pre-CS), the CS that predicted the same outcome as the response (Same), and the CS that predicted a different outcome (Diff).
- Figure 5.
Effect of OFC lesions on pavlovian contingency degradation. Mean number of magazine entries performed per minute (±SEM) over two-session blocks of contingency degradation training, plotted separately for the pre-CS period (Pre-CS), the CS paired with the noncontingent outcome (Degraded), and the other CS (Other). The data are presented separately for the sham (top) and OFC (bottom) groups.
