↓ Skip to main content

Neural Signals Related to Outcome Evaluation Are Stronger in CA1 than CA3

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Neural Signals Related to Outcome Evaluation Are Stronger in CA1 than CA3
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2017.00040
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sung-Hyun Lee, Namjung Huh, Jong Won Lee, Jeong-Wook Ghim, Inah Lee, Min W. Jung

Abstract

We have shown previously that CA1 conveys significant neural signals necessary to update value of the chosen target, namely chosen value and reward signals. To better understand hippocampal neural processes related to valuation, we compared chosen value- and reward-related neural activity between the CA3 and CA1 regions. Single units were recorded with tetrodes from the dorsal CA3 and CA1 regions of rats performing a dynamic foraging task, and chosen value- and reward-related neural activity was estimated using a reinforcement learning model and multiple regression analyses. Neural signals for chosen value and reward converged in both CA3 and CA1 when a trial outcome was revealed. However, these neural signals were stronger in CA1 than CA3. Consequently, neural signals for reward prediction error and updated chosen value were stronger in CA1 than CA3. Together with our previous finding that CA1 conveys stronger value signals than the subiculum, our results raise the possibility that CA1 might play a particularly important role among hippocampal subregions in evaluating experienced events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Psychology 5 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 30%
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 17 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,899,796
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#854
of 1,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,962
of 317,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#19
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 317,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.