↓ Skip to main content

Expectancies in decision making, reinforcement learning, and ventral striatum

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
212 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Expectancies in decision making, reinforcement learning, and ventral striatum
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2010
DOI 10.3389/neuro.01.006.2010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthijs A A Van Der Meer, A. David Redish

Abstract

Decisions can arise in different ways, such as from a gut feeling, doing what worked last time, or planful deliberation. Different decision-making systems are dissociable behaviorally, map onto distinct brain systems, and have different computational demands. For instance, "model-free" decision strategies use prediction errors to estimate scalar action values from previous experience, while "model-based" strategies leverage internal forward models to generate and evaluate potentially rich outcome expectancies. Animal learning studies indicate that expectancies may arise from different sources, including not only forward models but also Pavlovian associations, and the flexibility with which such representations impact behavior may depend on how they are generated. In the light of these considerations, we review the results of van der Meer and Redish (2009a), who found that ventral striatal neurons that respond to reward delivery can also be activated at other points, notably at a decision point where hippocampal forward representations were also observed. These data suggest the possibility that ventral striatal reward representations contribute to model-based expectancies used in deliberative decision making.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
France 5 2%
United Kingdom 3 1%
Germany 3 1%
Japan 3 1%
Canada 3 1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 183 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 24 11%
Student > Master 18 8%
Professor 14 7%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 16 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 58 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 57 27%
Neuroscience 27 13%
Computer Science 23 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 5%
Other 19 9%
Unknown 18 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 May 2020.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,668
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,573
of 172,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#30
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 172,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.