Dataset Information

Investigating the balance between goal-directed and habitual control in experimental and real-life settings.

ABSTRACT: Do people differ in their propensity to form habits? The current study related individual differences in habitual performance on the slips-of-action task to habit formation in real life. To this end, we developed a novel key-cover procedure that controls for the amount of repetition and motivation within a naturalistic setting. Participants received a key cover for the key to their home, which after several weeks was switched with a key cover that was previously attached to a dummy key. Participants recorded effort, time, attention, and mistakes in the key-selection process. Results were in line with established properties of habits, as attention decreased in the learning phase, yet effort, time, and mistakes increased after the key-cover switch. Performance on the slips-of-action task correlated negatively with changes in attention in the real-life key-cover task. This negative correlation may reflect that flexible behavioral adjustment requires more attention in people with a relatively weak goal-directed system.

SUBMITTER: Linnebank FE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6105188 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Investigating the balance between goal-directed and habitual control in experimental and real-life settings.

Linnebank Floris E FE Kindt Merel M de Wit Sanne S

Learning & behavior 20180901 3

Do people differ in their propensity to form habits? The current study related individual differences in habitual performance on the slips-of-action task to habit formation in real life. To this end, we developed a novel key-cover procedure that controls for the amount of repetition and motivation within a naturalistic setting. Participants received a key cover for the key to their home, which after several weeks was switched with a key cover that was previously attached to a dummy key. Particip ...[more]

PMID: 29426981

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHarmful behavior such as smoking may reflect a disturbance in the balance of goal-directed and habitual control. Animal models suggest that habitual control develops after prolonged substance use. In this study, we investigated whether smokers (N = 49) differ from controls (N = 46) in the regulation of goal-directed and habitual behavior. It was also investigated whether individual differences in nicotine dependence levels were associated with habitual responding.MethodsWe used two different multistage instrumental learning tasks that consist of an instrumental learning phase, subsequent outcome devaluation, and a testing phase to measure the balance between goal-directed and habitual responding. The testing phases of these tasks occurred after either appetitive versus avoidance instrumental learning. The appetitive versus aversive instrumental learning stages in the two different tasks modeled positive versus negative reinforcement, respectively.ResultsSmokers and nonsmoking controls did not differ on habitual versus goal-directed control in either task. Individual differences in nicotine dependence within the group of smokers, however, were positively associated with habitual responding after appetitive instrumental learning. This effect seems to be due to impaired stimulus-outcome learning, thereby hampering goal-directed task performance and tipping the balance to habitual responding.ConclusionsThe current finding highlights the importance of individual differences within smokers. For future research, neuroimaging studies are suggested to further unravel the nature of the imbalance between goal-directed versus habitual control in severely dependent smokers by directly measuring activity in the corresponding brain systems.ImplicationsGoal-directed versus habitual behavior in substance use and addiction is highly debated. This study investigated goal-directed versus habitual control in smokers. The findings suggest that smokers do not differ from controls in goal-directed versus habitual control. Individual differences in nicotine dependence within smokers, however, were positively associated with habitual responding after appetitive instrumental learning. This effect seems to be due to impaired stimulus-outcome learning, thereby hampering goal-directed task performance and tipping the balance to habitual responding. These findings add to the ongoing debate on habitual versus goal-directed control in addiction and emphasize the importance of individual differences within smokers.

Project description:Behavioral evidence suggests that instrumental conditioning is governed by two forms of action control: a goal-directed and a habit learning process. Model-based reinforcement learning (RL) has been argued to underlie the goal-directed process; however, the way in which it interacts with habits and the structure of the habitual process has remained unclear. According to a flat architecture, the habitual process corresponds to model-free RL, and its interaction with the goal-directed process is coordinated by an external arbitration mechanism. Alternatively, the interaction between these systems has recently been argued to be hierarchical, such that the formation of action sequences underlies habit learning and a goal-directed process selects between goal-directed actions and habitual sequences of actions to reach the goal. Here we used a two-stage decision-making task to test predictions from these accounts. The hierarchical account predicts that, because they are tied to each other as an action sequence, selecting a habitual action in the first stage will be followed by a habitual action in the second stage, whereas the flat account predicts that the statuses of the first and second stage actions are independent of each other. We found, based on subjects' choices and reaction times, that human subjects combined single actions to build action sequences and that the formation of such action sequences was sufficient to explain habitual actions. Furthermore, based on Bayesian model comparison, a family of hierarchical RL models, assuming a hierarchical interaction between habit and goal-directed processes, provided a better fit of the subjects' behavior than a family of flat models. Although these findings do not rule out all possible model-free accounts of instrumental conditioning, they do show such accounts are not necessary to explain habitual actions and provide a new basis for understanding how goal-directed and habitual action control interact.

Dataset Information

Investigating the balance between goal-directed and habitual control in experimental and real-life settings.

Publications

Investigating the balance between goal-directed and habitual control in experimental and real-life settings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets