Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41248176›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Trial-by-trial learning of successor representations in human behavior.

Ari E Kahn, Dani S Bassett, Nathaniel D Daw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Planning in the Brain: It's Not What You Think It Is.Annual review of neuroscience · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ari E KahnPrinceton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2127-0507
Dani S BassettDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Nathaniel D DawPrinceton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5029-1430

Funding

Value networks and hippocampal non-local representationsR01MH136875 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JOSHUA D BERKE, Nathaniel Douglass Daw · 2024 to 2026
$2.4M
CRCNS: Computational Foundations for Externalizing/Internalizing PsychopathologyR01MH135587 · NIMH · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI DAW, NATHANIEL DOUGLASS · 2023 to 2025
$613k
Evolution of the Linked Architecture of Network Control and Executive Function in AdolescenceR21MH106799 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH, SATTERTHWAITE, THEODORE · 2016 to 2017
$515k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH135587NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH136875NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH106799
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decisions in humans and other organisms depend, in part, on learning and using models that capture the statistical structure of the world, including the long-run expected outcomes of our actions. One prominent approach to forecasting such long-run outcomes is the successor representation (SR), which predicts future states aggregated over multiple timesteps. Although much behavioral and neural evidence suggests that people and animals use such a representation, it remains unknown how they acquire it. It has frequently been assumed to be learned by temporal difference bootstrapping (SR-TD(0)), but this assumption has largely not been empirically tested or compared to alternatives including eligibility traces (SR-TD([Formula: see text])). Here we address this gap by leveraging trial-by-trial reaction times in graph sequence learning tasks, which are favorable for studying learning dynamics because the long horizons in these studies differentiate the transient update dynamics of different learning rules. We examined the behavior of SR-TD(λ) on a probabilistic graph learning task alongside a number of alternatives, and found that behavior was best explained by a hybrid model which learned via SR-TD(λ) alongside an additional predictive model of recency. The relatively large λ we estimate indicates a predominant role of eligibility trace mechanisms over the bootstrap-based chaining typically assumed. Our results provide insight into how humans learn predictive representations, and demonstrate that people simultaneously learn the SR alongside lower-order predictions.

Indexed as

Decision MakingLearningAdultComputational BiologyFemaleHumansMaleReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID41248176
PMCPMC12643320

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.