{"title":"Variable schedules of reinforcement do not reliably distinguish habit from goal-directed behavior","authors":"Evdokia Skalnik, Natalia Ivlieva","doi":"10.1016/j.neulet.2025.138132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Contemporary analyses of neurophysiological mechanisms of associative learning suggest that instrumental behavior can be controlled by separable action and habit processes. An increasingly broad range of human psychiatric and neurological disorders are now associated with maladaptive habit formation. The question of how the brain controls transitions into habit is thus relevant. Widely used training procedures that might differentially generate goal-directed actions or habits are variable schedules of reinforcement. Random interval schedules are known to generate habitual behavior compared with random ratio schedules Here, we report attempt to identify the behavioral characteristics of the bifurcation point of habitual and goal-directed behavior. We compared the time courses of learning in random ratio and random interval schedules with more common for neurophysiological researches parameters. Behavioral differences between schedules emerge early in learning. However, in outcome devaluation test we found that training in the random ratio schedule, but not in the random interval schedule, led to results interpreted as habitual behavior. This result is the opposite of what we expected based on previous research. We assume that the most commonly used variable schedules of reinforcement cannot serve as a reliable tool for analyzing neural mechanisms of habitual and goal-directed behavior.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19290,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience Letters","volume":"849 ","pages":"Article 138132"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience Letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304394025000205","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Contemporary analyses of neurophysiological mechanisms of associative learning suggest that instrumental behavior can be controlled by separable action and habit processes. An increasingly broad range of human psychiatric and neurological disorders are now associated with maladaptive habit formation. The question of how the brain controls transitions into habit is thus relevant. Widely used training procedures that might differentially generate goal-directed actions or habits are variable schedules of reinforcement. Random interval schedules are known to generate habitual behavior compared with random ratio schedules Here, we report attempt to identify the behavioral characteristics of the bifurcation point of habitual and goal-directed behavior. We compared the time courses of learning in random ratio and random interval schedules with more common for neurophysiological researches parameters. Behavioral differences between schedules emerge early in learning. However, in outcome devaluation test we found that training in the random ratio schedule, but not in the random interval schedule, led to results interpreted as habitual behavior. This result is the opposite of what we expected based on previous research. We assume that the most commonly used variable schedules of reinforcement cannot serve as a reliable tool for analyzing neural mechanisms of habitual and goal-directed behavior.
期刊介绍:
Neuroscience Letters is devoted to the rapid publication of short, high-quality papers of interest to the broad community of neuroscientists. Only papers which will make a significant addition to the literature in the field will be published. Papers in all areas of neuroscience - molecular, cellular, developmental, systems, behavioral and cognitive, as well as computational - will be considered for publication. Submission of laboratory investigations that shed light on disease mechanisms is encouraged. Special Issues, edited by Guest Editors to cover new and rapidly-moving areas, will include invited mini-reviews. Occasional mini-reviews in especially timely areas will be considered for publication, without invitation, outside of Special Issues; these un-solicited mini-reviews can be submitted without invitation but must be of very high quality. Clinical studies will also be published if they provide new information about organization or actions of the nervous system, or provide new insights into the neurobiology of disease. NSL does not publish case reports.