Monkeys with medial, but not lateral, OFC lesions also exhibit irrational context-dependence of their choices in a 3-option probabilistic decision making task; after surgery, logistic functions describing the pattern of choices between pairs of options became affected by the value of the 3rd available option in these animals, violating normative models of rational choice [29•]. Such effects were particularly prominent during difficult choices. What is common to situations that recruit or require VMPFC during value-guided decision making is that, first, the goal is clearly selectable from currently this website presented stimuli and, second,

the task environment requires relevant information to be sampled and selected

for an optimal choice to be made. Indeed, an alternative account of the chosen minus unchosen comparison signal in VMPFC is that it instead reflects the difference between an attended and an unattended option, especially as chosen items generally are attended longer than unchosen ones 46 and 47•]. Neurons in dorsal parts of VMPFC encode value information particularly around attentional shifts, suggesting integration between the allocation of attention and valuation processes [48]. A change in the way information is attended to and acquired following VMPFC damage [49] might explain why the predominant deficit observed experimentally Orotic acid in monkeys Ferroptosis activation and humans with VMPFC damage is an increased tendency for inconsistent choices 15•, 50 and 51]. Unlike the maladaptive increase in exploratory choices seen following OFC lesions [28], this cannot be explained by impaired value learning [29•]. One way of integrating these ideas is to suggest that VMPFC does not just mediate value comparison, but is also required to maintain selective focus on information that is most relevant to the current goal. Chau and colleagues [52••] investigated how the presence of a third, but unavailable and therefore irrelevant, alternative would influence speeded choices between two other relevant options (Figure 2A). They found that

people would on average make more suboptimal choices during difficult decisions when the value of the unavailable distractor was comparatively low and the presence of such a low value distractor reduced the VMPFC value comparison signal (Figure 2B-C). Moreover, subjects who showed the greatest influence of the distractor on the VMPFC value comparison signal also made fewer choices of the best option (Figure 2D). There was also evidence that this process was influenced by interactions with OFC. The value comparison signal in VMPFC was positively coupled with activity in lateral OFC whereas the influence of the distractor on the VMPFC signal was negatively coupled with a similar part of lateral OFC.