ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Influence of surprise on reinforcement learning in younger and older adults.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Curiosity and surprise differentially affect memory depending on age.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Replay in the human visual cortex during brief task pauses is linked to implicit learning of successor representations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- The preference for surprise in reinforcement learning underlies the differences in developmental changes in risk preference between autistic and neurotypical youth.Molecular autism · 2025Article
- Neural correlates of reduced sensitivity to information about uncertainty during valuation in older adults: An fNIRS study.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- An inductive bias for slowly changing features in human reinforcement learning.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Surprise is a key component of many learning experiences, and yet its precise computational role, and how it changes with age, remain debated. One major challenge is that surprise often occurs jointly with other variables, such as uncertainty and outcome probability. To assess how humans learn from surprising events, and whether aging affects this process, we studied choices while participants learned from bandits with either Gaussian or bi-modal outcome distributions, which decoupled outcome probability, uncertainty, and surprise. A total of 102 participants (51 older, aged 50-73; 51 younger, 19-30 years) chose between three bandits, one of which had a bimodal outcome distribution. Behavioral analyses showed that both age-groups learned the average of the bimodal bandit less well. A trial-by-trial analysis indicated that participants performed choice reversals immediately following large absolute prediction errors, consistent with heightened sensitivity to surprise. This effect was stronger in older adults. Computational models indicated that learning rates in younger as well as older adults were influenced by surprise, rather than uncertainty, but also suggested large interindividual variability in the process underlying learning in our task. Our work bridges between behavioral economics research that has focused on how outcomes with low probability affect choice in older adults, and reinforcement learning work that has investigated age differences in the effects of uncertainty and suggests that older adults overly adapt to surprising events, even when accounting for probability and uncertainty effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.