IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007443.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No substantial change in the balance between model-free and model-based control via training on the two-step task

Author

Listed:
  • Elmar D Grosskurth
  • Dominik R Bach
  • Marcos Economides
  • Quentin J M Huys
  • Lisa Holper

Abstract

Human decisions can be habitual or goal-directed, also known as model-free (MF) or model-based (MB) control. Previous work suggests that the balance between the two decision systems is impaired in psychiatric disorders such as compulsion and addiction, via overreliance on MF control. However, little is known whether the balance can be altered through task training. Here, 20 healthy participants performed a well-established two-step task that differentiates MB from MF control, across five training sessions. We used computational modelling and functional near-infrared spectroscopy to assess changes in decision-making and brain hemodynamic over time. Mixed-effects modelling revealed overall no substantial changes in MF and MB behavior across training. Although our behavioral and brain findings show task-induced changes in learning rates, these parameters have no direct relation to either MF or MB control or the balance between the two systems, and thus do not support the assumption of training effects on MF or MB strategies. Our findings indicate that training on the two-step paradigm in its current form does not support a shift in the balance between MF and MB control. We discuss these results with respect to implications for restoring the balance between MF and MB control in psychiatric conditions.Author summary: Psychiatric conditions such as compulsion or addiction are associated with an overreliance on habitual, or model-free, decision-making. Goal-directed, or model-based, decision-making may protect against such overreliance. We therefore asked whether model-free control could be reduced, and model-based control strengthened, via task training. We used the well-characterized two-step task that differentiates model-based from model-free actions. Our results suggest that training on the current form of the two-step task does not support a shift in the balance between model-free and model-based strategies. Factors such as devaluation, demotivation or automatization during training may play a role in the missing emergence of a training effect. Future studies could adapt the two-step task so as to separate such factors from decision-making strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Elmar D Grosskurth & Dominik R Bach & Marcos Economides & Quentin J M Huys & Lisa Holper, 2019. "No substantial change in the balance between model-free and model-based control via training on the two-step task," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007443
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007443
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007443
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007443&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007443?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007443. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.