Cited by 161Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Model-based predictions for dopamine

Open access
Langdon, Angela J, Sharpe, Melissa J, Schoenbaum, Geoffrey, Niv, Yael·2018·Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Abstract

Phasic dopamine responses are thought to encode a prediction-error signal consistent with model-free reinforcement learning theories. However, a number of recent findings highlight the influence of model-based computations on dopamine responses, and suggest that dopamine prediction errors reflect more dimensions of an expected outcome than scalar reward value. Here, we review a selection of these recent results and discuss the implications and complications of model-based predictions for computational theories of dopamine and learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conb.2017.10.006

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [6]Sutton RS Barto AG Reinforcement learning: An introduction 1 MIT press Cambridge 1998
  2. [54]Hiroyuki N Multiplexing signals in reinforcement learning with internal models and dopamine Current opinion in neurobiology 2014 25 123 129 24463329

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Langdon, A. J., Sharpe, M. J., Schoenbaum, G., & Niv, Y.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (US)
Corresponding author
Langdon, Angela J
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-04
Volume
49
Pages
1-7
ISSN
0959-4388 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2765818177
Cited by
161
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurobiology (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA042065, ZIA-DA000587)
  • Army Research Office (W911NF-14-1-0101)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
dopamine, prediction error, model-based learning, model-free reinforcement learning, reward prediction
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Dopamine, Humans, Learning, Models, Neurological, Reinforcement, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review