A deeper dive into motivation and decision-making highlighting the Orbitofrontal Cortex’s (OFC) role in this “Value Cortex”
By Vanessa NyBlom UA’25 and Jim Stellar
Introduction
We dedicate this blog post to Dr. Stephen Nadeau, MD of the Neurology Department of the University of Florida at Gainesville, who was an inspiration for this blog on the OFC. It also follows some earlier blog writing our group did on the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), hence the words “A deeper dive…” in the title.
Let’s begin with a quote from the famous writer, Oscar Wilde, on the idea of bringing value into the idea of the cognitive, abstract, information-based, decision-making of the neocortex. He wrote, “A cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” In general this entire blog series is really about cognitive-limbic integration where neocortical brain areas seem to extract value by trying to read limbic system processing. We think that the cortex re-represents limbic input at the neocortical symbolic level so it can be brought to bear on cognitive plans. For example, we often wrote in this blog series about how internships make an implicit impact on a college student who then confirms or alters their plan for their major field of study in college on the basis of that experience. We further think that such integration develops the beginning professional wisdom in them and that helps with their taking the next step after college whether it is a job or going on to graduate level education. What colleges and universities do not want to do is to graduate cynics.
The OFC
Here we focus on the OFC particularly in humans and higher primates where it is most developed. The OFC is seen as a key part of a larger cortical network that we and others have called the value cortical network. For example, we two wrote an initial blog on an anatomical pathway of frontal cortex-amygdala interaction in rats. Another person from our lab group wrote a blog on the OFC in humans, and finally a group of us wrote a comprehensive blog that mentioned the OFC as part of a number of neocortical areas in the frontal lobe that seem to interact with limbic system value determinations where the job of the cortex in another blog is seen as abstract symbolic reasoning or cognition.
To repeat that a bit here, we argue that the function of these frontal cortex areas is to give rise to the feelings of “value” that we experience in our activities of daily living. Gaining the motivation to get out of bed in the morning, brush our teeth, dress ourselves, etc. We suggest that these behaviors are driven from the part of our brain which tells us that these things have value and are important. Someone, therefore, with damage to their OFC (and maybe other frontal cortical areas) would be asking why it is necessary for them to get out of bed, brush their teeth, dress themselves, etc, because they simply don’t see a reason to do so. Or when a college student is faced with a decision (e.g. Should I continue my premedical studies or what did I learn from that hospital internship?), they would make a poor decision without this value input. When we push ourselves to do these activities, the OFC’s function and interconnections are important.
OFC basics
Three key papers: The OFC controls co-occurring emotions of motivation and pleasure, or the lack thereof, and therefore the risk/reward network that allows us to weigh the pros and cons of a situation. These feelings can also have an effect on psychiatric disorders like borderline personality disorder, depression, etc. We first discuss these three papers below
First, a 2020 paper by Edmund Rolls et al., that includes their own research work, suggests that the OFC in the primate brain is specifically important in the representation of reward value, as well as the lack of expected reward and even how it might be involved with depression. This thinking supports the idea that the OFC is a key area in determining value in decision making, but perhaps not the first step of stimulus evaluation and perhaps not the final step of acting on that value. However, this paper (and others) point to the extraordinary complexity of the OFC as shown in the diagram below with the OFC sub-regions. We will not deal with all of them here as that is beyond the scope of this blog.
Second, 2022 finding review by Knudsen and Wallis looks at how the OFC integrates and anticipates rewards leading to a value understanding. This can be complex when an event has multiple dimensions, like a piece of chocolate reward that varies in either sweetness and/or in size. This paper also ties the value estimate to the cognitive map of the area and explores more straight-forward reward learning with model-based reward learning particularly in environmental situations that change, perhaps without warning.
Third, a 2004 paper by RJR Blair tells us that this brain area also has a role in aggression, explaining that aggression elicited in response to frustration or a threat, as well as goal-directed behavior, is what we call instrumental reactive aggression, suggesting the OFC’s role in this emotional response, and perhaps others as well.
There are other papers we could cite, but we focus on these three in this blog.
Starting with the first 2020 paper by Edmund Rolls et al., the figure below presents the circuitry: Each basic neural pathway in primates and the parts that control each emotion that brings value to our decisions. It shows a three-tier organization: 1) stimulus identity, 2) reward/affective value (on which we are particularly focused), and 3) final decision making or behavioral output.
This figure maps out the connectivity within each of these three tiers and how they affect one another like dominoes knocking each other over in sequence in the actual processing of a stimulus from a sensory organ. For example, looking at one of the blue arrows, the ear sends the auditory stimuli to the temporal lobe’s auditory cortex and then up to the OFC. Similar processing happens in the other senses to get a refined input to the OFC. In the OFC, we can also see the cognitive/attentional top-down bias coming into play as the upward pointing purple arrow. Notice, this top-down bias is not diagrammed as being present in the amygdala, but we do know and have written about it in rats that the amygdala is interconnected with parts of the prefrontal cortex. The OFC then takes the stimulus in multiple output directions, resulting in choice value decision making, action-outcome learning, stimulus-response habit learning, and autonomic/endocrine response. Here the influence of the amygdala is also felt in every OFC output.
Specifically zooming into the reward/affective behavior in tier two, we can see the amygdala’s role in the somatosensory inputs that gradually makes its way to the OFC. In that earlier blog, as mentioned above on the rat frontal cortex and amygdala connection, we discussed that the neural pathways between the basal lateral amygdala (BLA) and the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is a loop that allows inhibitory neurons to potentially create these feelings of fear and motivation in the BLA in concert with the operation of the PFC. From the much more complex figure above that is based on primates, we can see how these amygdala-based OFC networks have a proposed role in the first step in the emotions discussed. The idea, functionally, is that when relevant emotions with a neocortical component have been created by the PFC and the BLA from that earlier blog, they are able to further project in the OFC, where they become prevalent in decision-making in that figure.
We cannot let this OFC-Amygdala-reward discussion pass without noting, in a side note, that the reward process is also thought to primarily involve the nucleus accumbens and its dopamine projection. However, a 2000 review paper, suggests that OFC-accumbens connections are not robust while the amygdala connections are. On the other hand, a very recent 2025 paper in rats does discuss OFC to accumbens projections, but they do not figure prominently in the figure above. In a related point, there are papers that specifically focus on the amygdala and reward effects (not fear), including one in by that title in 2005, a more recent one in 2015 in monkeys, and a very recent one in 2025 on future rewards. And we note the still prominent attention given to the nucleus accumbens on the reward and drug addiction literature even going into dopamine receptor subtypes and their selective roles in reward processing. However, reward itself is not the focus of this blog – perhaps another one. Our focus is on the role of the OFC in cognitive-emotional integration in decision-making. And we are aware that some of this work is based on rats where we want to stay largely at the primate level with the OFC.
Effects of damage to the OFC in primates (and humans): A 2022 finding by Knudsen and Wallis in non-human primates on OFC neuronal firing in anticipation of the value of outcomes, correctly suggests that people with damage to OFC should have specific problems making decisions, whereas their other cognitive functions are spared. They started their paper with a mention of Antonio Damaiso’s 1994 book Descartes Error and then introduced a study of patients with OFC damage who rapidly lost all of their money given to them in a neuroeconomics risk-reward experiment by making poor decisions. We can see that by imagining that in the figure above we crossed out the OFC. The overall value function represented as diagrammed in that figure would be compromised. Frankly, the entire network of decision making fails.
In terms of the relationship between value and decision making, the somatosensory factors of vision, taste, olfaction, touch, and auditory, all come together to provide input in making the final decision. Therefore the amygdala and OFC have to provide the value-coded aspect of that decision. We will come back to this idea later. For now, consider that in experiential learning, we see college students with a full time school schedule, sometimes a job on top of school-work, still feeling the need to get an internship, many times unpaid, because they value furthering their knowledge in their potential professional field to be the best candidate for their career at a later time. This value is what makes that decision. Someone with a damaged OFC and therefore limited value cortex planning function, would likely not care to further their education or capabilities, especially if they are not getting a direct reward out of it, because the task-related-reward behavior is also diminished.
In that 2022 study by Kundsen and Wallison cited above, non-human primates showed that OFC neurons respond to a range of ways by which the desirability of the option changes. A firing rate-based diagram in the figure below shows that Individual OFC neurons are encoding the value of the chosen picture when given two pictures in a spatial array. This is shown on the left side of the figure below. But this part of the figure is not an actual physical map of six circles in a rectangular shape, it is a conceptual map to show the state-to-state change during value interference in the process of making a decision. We can see in this, from the color changes in the figure, the reward shift from the more reddish areas being higher reward stimulus and the more grey areas showing a lower reaction to the reward stimulus. The right side of the figure below shows how this spatial value map in the abstract might apply to a common real-world activity of going to a restaurant and making decisions beginning at the point of entry, going all the way through the experience, and down to leaving the restaurant.
In the experimental study the researchers first taught the primates the value of both photographs. It turned out that about half of the value-encoding neurons ended up having a positive relationship between OFC firing rate and value (top on the left side), while the other half had a negative relationship (bottom on the left side). The spike in firing rate between both then changed at the point of a decision, and it became either a negative or positive trend. One key finding in this study is that the firing rate is also linked to the location where the action will be taken, as though the monkeys were building a value spatial map to support their decision, and that idea goes to the right side of the above diagram in the restaurant scenario.
To repeat a bit and focus on the value spatial map in the above figure, the right side shows how we use these interpretations of “value” to make even the most basic of decisions in the example of the restaurant. This example even takes into account social norms, such as adhering to the expectations of others, as well as getting what the individual came there to do. It includes the way that our brain and our process of decision making changes based on what environment we are experiencing, being that sometimes we are taken to a table and sat by a staff member, but sometimes we are to choose our seats ourselves. This is an amazing example of a spur-of-the-moment time where we have to make the decision to lead ourselves, or be led, which is going to change the value behind what is the goal. We can see the value interference that reward has at times where it is more heightened and times that it is less. Our brain is going to turn the idea of a reward into value inference, perhaps to even rationalize what is the goal in the first place. It is a small step for us to think of the college student going through their career plans as they “walk through” the experience of an internship in college in what might be (or what might not be) their future careers.
OFC divisions of Medial (reward) and Lateral (punishers/non-reward)
Going back to the 2020 Rolls et al. paper and just a bit of the complexity represented in the first figure of this blog, we can expand on the divisions of the OFC, as to how the medial portion is a driving force on the receipt of reward, while the lateral portion of the OFC has a significant role when the reward does not come and also in punishment. This is important as one has to learn where the reward is and also what to do if that reward no longer comes. OFC damage in humans can result in persistent responding on a learned reward task, long after the rules have been changed and the reward is no longer arriving. These two OFC areas are shown in the figure below from that Rolls et al. paper.
The figure above is actually taken from another 2020 study cited in that Rolls et al paper (and also involving Rolls himself) where we see two graphs based on fMRI studies in people in the age range of college students. Both graphs show the activity of the fMRI increase in the medial part of the OFC (in green) when the experiment results in a win and more so with a large win. They also show a decrease in the activation of the lateral part of the OFC under these same circumstances. What is also intriguing is that in the 19 year old subject vs the 14 year old subject the graphs are shifted so that “no win” produces a bigger difference and “large win” produces a smaller difference. What this shows about anticipation or the predictive factor of the brain is monumental.
Anticipation: What can we take from the findings laid out in the figure above? When presented with the anticipation of a reward, subjects show significant activity of the medial OFC during a win, some during a small win, and very little during the lack of a win. The same findings are seen for the opposite of the lateral OFC, being that there is a significant activity period during the lack of a win, being that period of depression and emotions of punishment, while there is a medial time during a small win, and very little activity during a large win. We could even classify this as being a situation where, when reward is introduced, or does not exist at all, the two areas cannot exist together. A small win is the only time we see slight activity from both medial and lateral OFC maybe because here the subject did not lose but they also did not win.
Explaining value or the action of putting value on something, whether it be a moral code or a material object is something that is more of a construct. For example, consider someone who grew up with a very low family income and always struggled with money. They are is going to find much more value in money as a general object, maybe in the way that they collect their coins with their change. However, someone that grew up in a higher wealth class and who has never struggled with money is going to find less value in it. They may be more willing to have the cashier keep the change. The reason this matters is because those feelings of reward and punishment cannot be the same for those two people. For example, if they were both presented with ten dollars, and told to keep it, the positive, reward-inducing (medial OFC) portion of the first subject’s brain is going to activate. While the second subject is going to have more likely a middle, to low activity of their medial OFC, and maybe a medium or higher level of activity in their lateral OFC, being that ten dollars to them may be disappointing, and therefore a lack of reward.
Some Speculation about Value, Goals, and the OFC
When we think about something we value, whether it be a goal or something from the past, we can recall the emotions paired with it. When a new year hits, and someone tells themselves that their resolution for the new year is to go to the gym five days a week and not eat at fast food restaurants, they are setting a goal for themselves. Now what we want to dive deeper into, is how the decisions we make based on that goal, are going to activate our brain areas, and which ones. What they found in this paper, is that it seems to not only be the reward, or the lack of the expected reward, that is to blame for these emotions. When we put value on a goal or reward, new brain areas are being utilized. We suspect that this means that our so-called “value cortex” plays a role larger than previously inferred. When we bring value into reward and punishment, we bring more specific emotion and priority into play.
What does this mean? This means that the same person with the new year’s resolutions might not make it to the gym. Maybe they were working a lot and were too tired to go, and then they didn’t have time to get to the grocery store so they picked up something from a fast food restaurant. What is going to happen to that person maybe in that moment, or maybe the next day, is that there are going to be feelings of shame, or general feelings of depression. That is because they put value into their goal, and they expected a reward, which they did not get. This adds another level of deeper emotion into what we know about learning, reward, and punishment. We can go back to the findings of Rolls and see that this means that this person’s lateral portion of their OFC is going to be firing a lot more than their medial portion.
But why does this matter? This is very important to what we know about activity when it comes to singular brain areas, because we can no longer classify the OFC as “active” or “inactive” at a specific time. It now becomes more specific, perhaps being able to tell that depressive patients likely have a much more active lateral OFC than medial OFC, which could have implications in treating that depression. When we know where a specific emotion or drive is coming from, we are further capable of diving into that area and being able to access it, and, if necessary, tweak it.
To tie all of this together, we emphasize the importance of understanding motivation and decision-making, specifically giving context toward the OFC as it emerges as a crucial component of what we have named the “Value Cortex,” because of its integration of sensory, emotional, and cognitive inputs to guide behavior. By assigning subjective value to choices, the OFC influences both goal-directed actions and habitual responses, shaping how individuals assess rewards and risks. Its intricate connections with other neural regions underscore its role in adapting decisions based on experience and changing circumstances. As research continues to unravel the complexities of the OFC, we expect that deeper insights into its function could enhance our understanding of behavioral disorders and perhaps even inform interventions aimed at improving human decision-making processes. Ultimately, the study of motivation and the OFC not only illuminates the neural underpinnings of choice but also highlights the dynamic interplay between cognition and emotion in shaping human behavior. We will likely expand this research, as well as previous research we have done (for example: 1, 2, 3, and 4) and our knowledge into how it may affect more specific activities of daily living, such as disorders like Major Depressive Disorder.
