Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33411724›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Model based planners reflect on their model-free propensities.

Rani Moran, Mehdi Keramati, Raymond J Dolan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Reinforcement-learning in fronto-striatal circuits.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Rani MoranMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7641-2402
Mehdi KeramatiMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Raymond J DolanMax Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 098362/Z/12/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dual-reinforcement learning theory proposes behaviour is under the tutelage of a retrospective, value-caching, model-free (MF) system and a prospective-planning, model-based (MB), system. This architecture raises a question as to the degree to which, when devising a plan, a MB controller takes account of influences from its MF counterpart. We present evidence that such a sophisticated self-reflective MB planner incorporates an anticipation of the influences its own MF-proclivities exerts on the execution of its planned future actions. Using a novel bandit task, wherein subjects were periodically allowed to design their environment, we show that reward-assignments were constructed in a manner consistent with a MB system taking account of its MF propensities. Thus, in the task participants assigned higher rewards to bandits that were momentarily associated with stronger MF tendencies. Our findings have implications for a range of decision making domains that includes drug abuse, pre-commitment, and the tension between short and long-term decision horizons in economics.

Indexed as

Models, PsychologicalReinforcement, PsychologyRewardComputational BiologyDecision MakingHumansIntention

Identifiers

PMID33411724
PMCPMC7817042

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.