Cited by 204Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Dopamine Reward Prediction Error Responses Reflect Marginal Utility

Open access
Stauffer, William R., Lak, Armin, Schultz, Wolfram·2014·Current Biology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Optimal choices require an accurate neuronal representation of economic value. In economics, utility functions are mathematical representations of subjective value that can be constructed from choices under risk. Utility usually exhibits a nonlinear relationship to physical reward value that corresponds to risk attitudes and reflects the increasing or decreasing marginal utility obtained with each additional unit of reward. Accordingly, neuronal reward responses coding utility should robustly reflect this nonlinearity. RESULTS: In two monkeys, we measured utility as a function of physical reward value from meaningful choices under risk (that adhered to first- and second-order stochastic dominance). The resulting nonlinear utility functions predicted the certainty equivalents for new gambles, indicating that the functions' shapes were meaningful. The monkeys were risk seeking (convex utility function) for low reward and risk avoiding (concave utility function) with higher amounts. Critically, the dopamine prediction error responses at the time of reward itself reflected the nonlinear utility functions measured at the time of choices. In particular, the reward response magnitude depended on the first derivative of the utility function and thus reflected the marginal utility. Furthermore, dopamine responses recorded outside of the task reflected the marginal utility of unpredicted reward. Accordingly, these responses were sufficient to train reinforcement learning models to predict the behaviorally defined expected utility of gambles. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest a neuronal manifestation of marginal utility in dopamine neurons and indicate a common neuronal basis for fundamental explanatory constructs in animal learning theory (prediction error) and economic decision theory (marginal utility).

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.cub.2014.08.064

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • The reward prediction-error response should be specifically considered to be a utility prediction error signal.

    “Furthermore, I suggest that the reward prediction-error response should be specifically considered to be a utility prediction error signal35.”

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. [2]Mas-Colell A. Whinston M.D. Green J.R. Microeconomic Theory 1995 Oxford University Press Oxford
  2. [5]Perloff J.M. Microeconomics Fifth Edition 2009 Pearson Boston

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stauffer, W. R., Lak, A., & Schultz, W.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Stauffer, William R.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-11
Volume
24
Issue
21
Pages
2491-2500
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981982902
Cited by
204
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 1
FWCI
9.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (095495)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
dopamine, reward prediction error, marginal utility, utility functions, risk preferences, choice under risk, stochastic dominance, certainty equivalent, reinforcement learning, economic decision-making
MeSH terms
Animals, Choice Behavior, Dopamine, Macaca mulatta, Male, Probability, Reward, Risk-Taking, Stochastic Processes

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