Evaluation of cognitive effort in rats is not critically dependent on ventrolateral orbitofrontal cortex.

Organisms must frequently evaluate the amount of effort to invest in pursuing future rewards. Despite explicit awareness of the potential benefits of cognitive work, individuals vary in their willingness to attempt cognitively demanding tasks, regardless of intellectual ability. Such differences may suggest that the degree to which cognitive effort degrades perceived outcome value is a subjective, rather than objective, process, similar to risk and delay discounting. Although numerous studies suggest the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) is important for allowing subjective value estimates to be updated and/or used in cost/benefit decision-making, the causal role of the OFC in valuations of mental effort has received scant investigation. We therefore trained 24 female Long-Evans rats on the rodent cognitive effort task (rCET) and assessed performance following temporary bilateral inactivation of the ventrolateral OFC (vlOFC). In the rCET, rats decide at trial outset whether to perform an easy or hard attentional challenge, namely to localize a brief visual stimulus to one of five possible locations. The difficulty of the challenge is determined by the stimulus duration (1.0 vs. 0.2s for easy vs. hard trials respectively), and success on hard trials results in double the sugar pellet rewards. Somewhat surprisingly, inactivations of the vlOFC did not affect rats' willingness or ability to exert cognitive effort for larger rewards, despite increasing omissions and motor impulsivity on-task. When considered with previous work, it appears the vlOFC plays a minimal role in cognitive effort allocation specifically, and in valuations of effort more generally.

Investigating serotonergic contributions to cognitive effort allocation, attention, and impulsive action in female rats.

BACKGROUND: Individuals must frequently evaluate whether it is worth allocating cognitive effort for desired outcomes. Motivational deficits are a common feature of psychiatric illness such as major depression. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are commonly used to treat this disorder, yet some data suggest these compounds are ineffective at treating amotivation, and may even exacerbate it. AIMS: Here we used the rodent Cognitive Effort Task (rCET) to assess serotonergic (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT) contributions to decision-making with cognitive effort costs. METHODS: The rCET is a modified version of the 5-choice serial reaction time task, a well-validated test of visuospatial attention and impulse control. At the start of each rCET trial, rats chose one of two levers, which set the difficulty of an attentional challenge, namely the localization of a visual stimulus illuminated for 0.2 or 1 s on hard versus easy trials. Successful completion of hard trials was rewarded with double the sugar pellets. Twenty-four female Long-Evans rats were trained on the rCET and systemically administered the 5-HT1A agonist 8-OH-DPAT, the 5-HT2A antagonist M100907, the 5-HT2C agonist Ro-60-0175, as well as the 5-HT2C antagonist SB 242, 084. RESULTS: 5-HT2A antagonism dose-dependently reduced premature responding, while 5-HT2C antagonism had the opposite effect. 8-OH-DPAT impaired accuracy of target detection at higher doses, while Ro-60-0175 dose-dependently improved accuracy on difficult trials. However, none of the drugs affected the rats' choice of the harder option. CONCLUSION: When considered with existing work evaluating decision-making with physical effort costs, it appears that serotonergic signalling plays a minor role in guiding effort allocation.