Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31175616›Full record

SynthesisCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2019

Decomposing the effects of context valence and feedback information on speed and accuracy during reinforcement learning: a meta-analytical approach using diffusion decision modeling.

Laura Fontanesi, Stefano Palminteri, Maël Lebreton

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Joint models reveal human subcortical underpinnings of choice and learning behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Neural Representation of Valenced and Generic Probability and Uncertainty.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Context-sensitive valuation and learning.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Laura FontanesiCenter of Economic Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Stefano PalminteriHuman Reinforcement Learning team, Université de Paris Sciences et Lettres, Paris, France. stefano.palminteri@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5768-6646
Maël LebretonAmsterdam Brain and Cognition, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

EPA EP-D-15-015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) models describe how humans and animals learn by trial-and-error to select actions that maximize rewards and minimize punishments. Traditional RL models focus exclusively on choices, thereby ignoring the interactions between choice preference and response time (RT), or how these interactions are influenced by contextual factors. However, in the field of perceptual decision-making, such interactions have proven to be important to dissociate between different underlying cognitive processes. Here, we investigated such interactions to shed new light on overlooked differences between learning to seek rewards and learning to avoid losses. We leveraged behavioral data from four RL experiments, which feature manipulations of two factors: outcome valence (gains vs. losses) and feedback information (partial vs. complete feedback). A Bayesian meta-analysis revealed that these contextual factors differently affect RTs and accuracy: While valence only affects RTs, feedback information affects both RTs and accuracy. To dissociate between the latent cognitive processes, we jointly fitted choices and RTs across all experiments with a Bayesian, hierarchical diffusion decision model (DDM). We found that the feedback manipulation affected drift rate, threshold, and non-decision time, suggesting that it was not a mere difficulty effect. Moreover, valence affected non-decision time and threshold, suggesting a motor inhibition in punishing contexts. To better understand the learning dynamics, we finally fitted a combination of RL and DDM (RLDDM). We found that while the threshold was modulated by trial-specific decision conflict, the non-decision time was modulated by the learned context valence. Overall, our results illustrate the benefits of jointly modeling RTs and choice data during RL, to reveal subtle mechanistic differences underlying decisions in different learning contexts.

Indexed as

Decision MakingFeedback, PsychologicalModels, BiologicalReaction TimeReinforcement, PsychologyAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultDecision diffusion modelDecision-makingMotivationReinforcement learningResponse timeReward

Identifiers

PMID31175616
PMCPMC6598978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.