The camera faced the whole cage and allowed
monkeys’ latencies to take food selleck chemical rewards placed at the back of the Perspex box to be measured and general behaviour and facial expressions to be recorded for later analysis. Four macaque monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were tested on a social valuation task (Rudebeck et al., 2006) before and after mOFC lesions. Briefly, animals were tested in the WGTA (Fig. 3A) and on every trial the monkey retrieved a small food item that was placed in a fixed central position on the top of a transparent plastic box. Two different emotive toy snakes (static and moving) were used to investigate fearfulness (experiment 1a). The five short films of other macaques (detailed above) were used to investigate social valuation in experiment 1b. Responsiveness to videos of humans staring was also assessed in experiment 1c. Finally, responsiveness to neutral control objects was also assessed in order to provide a baseline against which to compare any changes in fearfulness and social valuation (experiment 1d). On each trial, stimuli were placed in the Perspex box or displayed on a screen behind the box. The animal had 30 s to retrieve the food item or else an opaque moveable screen was lowered in between the animal and the box for the duration of a 30-s NU7441 molecular weight intertrial interval. The latency to reach for the piece of food indexed the
macaques’ assessments of the value of obtaining additional information about the stimulus before reaching, and reflected their relative valuation of the stimulus in contrast Nintedanib (BIBF 1120) to the incentive value of the food. On each day, animals were exposed to ten different stimuli of possible social or emotional importance and 20 neutral objects. The test was repeated
over four sessions (with a day of rest in between sessions) and the median reaching latency for each stimulus per animal was calculated. Each stimulus either in the box or on the screen was presented once per day. Objects in the box and images on the screen were presented in a pseudorandom order. The constraints enforced on order were that neutral object trials always followed trials in which potentially fear-inducing or social stimuli (snake or monitor stimuli) were presented. In experiment 1 two animals (mO1 and mO2) had acted as unoperated controls in a previous experiment (Rudebeck et al., 2006). The other two animals (mO3 and mO4) were tested only in this study pre- and postoperatively. The data from all four animals were considered together because there was no discernable difference between animals’ performances in relation to the time of testing. Animals were first habituated to the testing environment and then trained to take food from the top of the Perspex box while it was empty. The food reward was located at the centre of the back edge of the box nearest the PC monitor so that during the actual test the animal would have to reach over anything in the box or as close as possible to the monitor.