Differential Involvement of the Agranular vs Granular Insular Cortex in the Acquisition and Performance of Choice Behavior in a Rodent Gambling Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Substance-related and addictive disorders, in particular gambling disorder, are known to be associated with risky decision-making behavior. Several neuroimaging studies have identified the involvement of the insular cortex in decision-making under risk. However, the extent of this involvement remains unclear and the specific contributions of two distinct insular subregions, the rostral agranular (RAIC) and the caudal granular (CGIC), have yet to be examined. Animals were trained to perform a rat gambling task (rGT), in which subjects chose between four options that differed in the magnitude and probability of rewards and penalties. In order to address the roles of the RAIC and CGIC in established choice behavior, pharmacological inactivations of these two subregions via local infusions of GABA receptor agonists were performed following 30 rGT training sessions. The contribution made by the RAIC or CGIC to the acquisition of choice behavior was also determined by lesioning these areas before behavioral training. Inactivation of the RAIC, but not of the CGIC, shifted rats' preference toward options with greater reward frequency and lower punishment. Before rGT acquisition, lesions of the RAIC, but not the CGIC, likewise resulted in a higher preference for options with greater reward frequency and lower punishment, and this persisted throughout the 30 training sessions. Our results provide confirmation of the involvement of the RAIC in rGT choice behavior and suggest that the RAIC may mediate detrimental risky decision-making behavior, such as that associated with addiction and gambling disorder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".