Limits...
Devaluation and sequential decisions: linking goal-directed and model-based behavior.

Friedel E, Koch SP, Wendt J, Heinz A, Deserno L, Schlagenhauf F - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Bottom Line: More recently sequential decision-making tasks have been designed to assess the degree of goal-directed vs. habitual choice behavior in terms of an influential computational theory of model-based compared to model-free behavioral control.Correlational analysis revealed a positive association between model-based choices during sequential decisions and goal-directed behavior after devaluation suggesting a single framework underlying both operationalizations and speaking in favor of construct validity of both measurement approaches.Up to now, this has been merely assumed but never been directly tested in humans.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.

ABSTRACT
In experimental psychology different experiments have been developed to assess goal-directed as compared to habitual control over instrumental decisions. Similar to animal studies selective devaluation procedures have been used. More recently sequential decision-making tasks have been designed to assess the degree of goal-directed vs. habitual choice behavior in terms of an influential computational theory of model-based compared to model-free behavioral control. As recently suggested, different measurements are thought to reflect the same construct. Yet, there has been no attempt to directly assess the construct validity of these different measurements. In the present study, we used a devaluation paradigm and a sequential decision-making task to address this question of construct validity in a sample of 18 healthy male human participants. Correlational analysis revealed a positive association between model-based choices during sequential decisions and goal-directed behavior after devaluation suggesting a single framework underlying both operationalizations and speaking in favor of construct validity of both measurement approaches. Up to now, this has been merely assumed but never been directly tested in humans.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Subjects learn to choose the high probability stimulus in all three conditions (devalued: T = −3.50, p = 0.004, valued: T = −2.60, p = 0.022; and neutral: T = −2.73, p = 0.017), with a significant decrease of instrumental choice after devaluation only for the devalued stimulus (T = 3.15, p = 0.008).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120761&req=5

Figure 3: Subjects learn to choose the high probability stimulus in all three conditions (devalued: T = −3.50, p = 0.004, valued: T = −2.60, p = 0.022; and neutral: T = −2.73, p = 0.017), with a significant decrease of instrumental choice after devaluation only for the devalued stimulus (T = 3.15, p = 0.008).

Mentions: Over the course of training, participants (n = 14) chose the high-probability stimulus (delivering the rewarding food with a higher probability) significantly more often compared to the low probability stimulus (Figure 3). This was the case for all stimuli associated with the high-probability outcome in the last 10 trials of the training session [the devalued (T = −3.50, p = 0.004), valued (T = −2.60, p = 0.022), and neutral (T = −2.73, p = 0.017) condition].


Devaluation and sequential decisions: linking goal-directed and model-based behavior.

Friedel E, Koch SP, Wendt J, Heinz A, Deserno L, Schlagenhauf F - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Subjects learn to choose the high probability stimulus in all three conditions (devalued: T = −3.50, p = 0.004, valued: T = −2.60, p = 0.022; and neutral: T = −2.73, p = 0.017), with a significant decrease of instrumental choice after devaluation only for the devalued stimulus (T = 3.15, p = 0.008).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4120761&req=5

Figure 3: Subjects learn to choose the high probability stimulus in all three conditions (devalued: T = −3.50, p = 0.004, valued: T = −2.60, p = 0.022; and neutral: T = −2.73, p = 0.017), with a significant decrease of instrumental choice after devaluation only for the devalued stimulus (T = 3.15, p = 0.008).
Mentions: Over the course of training, participants (n = 14) chose the high-probability stimulus (delivering the rewarding food with a higher probability) significantly more often compared to the low probability stimulus (Figure 3). This was the case for all stimuli associated with the high-probability outcome in the last 10 trials of the training session [the devalued (T = −3.50, p = 0.004), valued (T = −2.60, p = 0.022), and neutral (T = −2.73, p = 0.017) condition].

Bottom Line: More recently sequential decision-making tasks have been designed to assess the degree of goal-directed vs. habitual choice behavior in terms of an influential computational theory of model-based compared to model-free behavioral control.Correlational analysis revealed a positive association between model-based choices during sequential decisions and goal-directed behavior after devaluation suggesting a single framework underlying both operationalizations and speaking in favor of construct validity of both measurement approaches.Up to now, this has been merely assumed but never been directly tested in humans.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.

ABSTRACT
In experimental psychology different experiments have been developed to assess goal-directed as compared to habitual control over instrumental decisions. Similar to animal studies selective devaluation procedures have been used. More recently sequential decision-making tasks have been designed to assess the degree of goal-directed vs. habitual choice behavior in terms of an influential computational theory of model-based compared to model-free behavioral control. As recently suggested, different measurements are thought to reflect the same construct. Yet, there has been no attempt to directly assess the construct validity of these different measurements. In the present study, we used a devaluation paradigm and a sequential decision-making task to address this question of construct validity in a sample of 18 healthy male human participants. Correlational analysis revealed a positive association between model-based choices during sequential decisions and goal-directed behavior after devaluation suggesting a single framework underlying both operationalizations and speaking in favor of construct validity of both measurement approaches. Up to now, this has been merely assumed but never been directly tested in humans.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus