ArticleComputational brain & behavior2026
Excessive Flexibility? Recurrent Neural Networks Can Accommodate Individual Differences in Reinforcement Learning Through In-Context Adaptation.
Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hybrid neural-cognitive models reveal how memory shapes human reward learning.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive and computational modeling has been used as a method to understand the processes underlying behavior in humans and other animals. A common approach in this field involves the use of theoretically constructed cognitive models, such as reinforcement learning models. However, human and animal decision-making often deviates from the predictions of these theoretical models. To capture characteristics that these cognitive models fail to account for, recurrent neural networks (RNNs) have been increasingly used to model choice behavior involving reinforcement learning. RNNs can capture how choice probabilities change depending on past experience. In this work, we demonstrate that RNNs can improve future choice predictions by capturing individual differences on the basis of past behavior, even when a single model is fit across the entire population. We refer to this capacity as the individual difference tracking (IDT) property. While the IDT property might be useful for prediction, it may introduce excessive flexibility when RNNs are used as benchmarks for predictive accuracy. We investigate the nature of the IDT property through simulation studies and examine how it affects the interpretation of predictive accuracy when RNNs are used as benchmarks for cognitive models. We also present examples using real-world data. Through these analyses, we discuss practical considerations and limitations in using RNNs as benchmarks for cognitive models. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42113-025-00254-8.
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.