CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 203Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Cognitive flexibility in adolescence: Neural and behavioral mechanisms of reward prediction error processing in adaptive decision making during development

Open access
Hauser, Tobias U., Iannaccone, Reto, Walitza, Susanne, Brandeis, Daniel, Brem, Silvia·2015·NeuroImage
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.018PMC PMC4330550
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Adolescence is associated with quickly changing environmental demands which require excellent adaptive skills and high cognitive flexibility. Feedback-guided adaptive learning and cognitive flexibility are driven by reward prediction error (RPE) signals, which indicate the accuracy of expectations and can be estimated using computational models. Despite the importance of cognitive flexibility during adolescence, only little is known about how RPE processing in cognitive flexibility deviates between adolescence and adulthood. In this study, we investigated the developmental aspects of cognitive flexibility by means of computational models and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We compared the neural and behavioral correlates of cognitive flexibility in healthy adolescents (12-16years) to adults performing a probabilistic reversal learning task. Using a modified risk-sensitive reinforcement learning model, we found that adolescents learned faster from negative RPEs than adults. The fMRI analysis revealed that within the RPE network, the adolescents had a significantly altered RPE-response in the anterior insula. This effect seemed to be mainly driven by increased responses to negative prediction errors. In summary, our findings indicate that decision making in adolescence goes beyond merely increased reward-seeking behavior and provides a developmental perspective to the behavioral and neural mechanisms underlying cognitive flexibility in the context of reinforcement learning.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Adolescents (12–16 years) and adults performed a probabilistic reversal learning task during fMRI; computational modeling showed adolescents learned faster from negative reward prediction errors (RPEs) than adults. This behavioral difference was accompanied by altered RPE-related anterior insula responses, mainly increased responses to negative RPEs in adolescents.

Key findings

  • Overall task performance did not differ between groups: adults made 73.83% ± 4.4% correct responses and adolescents 73.38% ± 4.6% (t(34) = .296, p = .769); reversals also did not differ (adults 23.35 ± 8.80, adolescents 26.11 ± 8.31; t(34) = −.965, p = .341).
  • The risk-sensitive model with anticorrelated valuation (RSAV) outperformed the other models, and adolescents had a significantly increased learning rate for negative RPEs in chosen objects (αc−: adults .49 ± .05, adolescents .69 ± .05; t(34) = −2.816, p = .04, corrected); other parameters did not differ significantly.
  • fMRI showed a significant group difference in the right anterior insula (peak MNI x = 33, y = 18, z = 3; t = 4.60, k = 33), with increased activation for decreasing RPEs in adolescents.
  • Exploratory binning of RPEs showed the anterior insula difference was driven by negative RPEs (adolescents vs adults: t(34) = −4.08, p < .001, corrected), while neutral (p = .734) and positive (p = .142) RPEs did not differ significantly.

Methods

  • Thirty-seven subjects participated; one adolescent was excluded for excessive movement (> 2.5 mm scan-to-scan motion). Final groups were 19 adolescents aged 12–16 years (14.7 ± 1.3, 10 females) and 17 adults aged 20–29 years (25.6 ± 2.4, 10 females).
  • Participants performed a probabilistic reversal learning task during fMRI: two runs of 60 trials each, plus 20 null trials per run; one stimulus was correct with 80% reward probability and the other with 20%, with reversals after at least 6 correct choices (maximum 10, randomly determined).
  • Three reinforcement learning models were compared (Rescorla–Wagner, risk-sensitive, and RSAV); parameters were estimated by maximum log-likelihood using a genetic search algorithm, compared with AIC and Bayesian model selection. fMRI analysis used SPM8, with model-derived RPEs entered as a parametric modulator at feedback; group comparisons were restricted to RPE-processing areas and used p < .05 cluster-extent FWE (voxel height p < .001).

Limitations

  • The paper states that the adolescent group had a relatively large age range (12–16 years), so the design cannot detect differences that may occur only early or late in adolescence.
  • The paper states that the relatively small sample size prevented analysis of age-related changes within adolescence; larger samples and/or longitudinal designs are needed.
  • Evident from the text: the study is cross-sectional, and for fMRI the authors estimated one single set of canonical model parameters for all participants rather than individual parameters, so neural analyses were not designed to model individual behavioral differences.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.018

Cites

91 of 91 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

19 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 65 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    The other model parameters (αc+, αu+, αu−, τ) did not differ significantly between adolescents and adults.

    “whereas the other parameters did not differ significantly (αc+: adults: .45 ± .10, adolescents: .62 ± .07, t(34) = − 1.336, p = .95; αu+: adults: .72 ± .08, adolescents: .78 ± .07, t(34) = − .581, p = 1.00; αu−: adults: .58 ± .06, adolescents: .63 ± .04, t(34) = − .636, p = 1.00; τ: 2.4 ± .2, adolescents: 1.9 ± .2, t(34) = 1.595, p = .60).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the anterior insula, there was a significant RPE-effect across all subjects.

    “The repeated measures ANOVA with factors group (adolescents, adults) and RPE (negative, neutral, positive) revealed a significant RPE-effect (indicating that the aIns is modulated by RPEs across all subjects, F(2,34) = 40.37, p < .001)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    RPEs were significantly anticorrelated with activity in the bilateral anterior insula, bilateral dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

    “The bilateral anterior insula (aIns), bilateral dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex were significantly anticorrelated with RPEs (decreasing RPEs elicit more activity, Table 2, Fig. 3A).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Within the RPE network, adolescents had a significantly altered RPE-response in the anterior insula.

    “The fMRI analysis revealed that within the RPE network, the adolescents had a significantly altered RPE-response in the anterior insula.”
    • Also stated in: § fMRI analysis · plain
      “We found one significant cluster in the right aIns (peak MNI x = 33, y = 18, z = 3; t = 4.60, k = 33, Fig. 3B) which showed increased activation for decreasing RPEs in adolescents.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “In the group comparison, we found a significantly different activation in the aIns.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The groups did not differ in the number of reversals performed.

    “The groups also did not differ in the number of reversals which they performed. The adults switched on average 23.35 (± 8.80) times and the adolescents reversed 26.11 (± 8.31) times (t(34) = − .965, p = .341).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 9
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 26

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both groups performed the probabilistic reversal learning task equally well, with no significant difference in correct responses.

    “Both groups performed the task equally well with 73.83% (± 4.4%) correct responses in adults and 73.38% (± 4.6%) in adolescents (t(34) = .296, p = .769).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    No significantly increased activation for positive RPEs was found in adolescents compared to adults.

    “We did not find any significantly increased activation for positive RPEs in adolescents.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a significant difference between the free parameters and a significant interaction between parameters and group.

    “We found a significant difference between the free parameters (F(4,136) = 73.45, p < .001) as well as an interaction between the parameters and the group (F(4,136) = 2.851, p = .026).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The risk-sensitive model with anticorrelated valuation (RSAV) outperformed the other reinforcement learning models across all subjects and in both groups separately.

    “The RSAV model clearly outperformed the other models across all subjects, as well as in both groups separately (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Probabilistic reversal learning tasks have often been used to test cognitive flexibility.

    “To test cognitive flexibility, probabilistic reversal learning tasks have often been used (e.g., Adleman et al., 2011; Britton et al., 2010; Clarke et al., 2004; Klanker et al., 2013; van der Plasse and Feenstra, 2008; Xue et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Adleman et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Britton et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Clarke et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Cognitive flexibility has mainly been operationalized by sudden and implicit shifts in reward contingencies that have to be detected based on external feedback.

    “In cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology, cognitive flexibility has mainly been operationalized by sudden and implicit shifts in reward contingencies that have to be detected based on external feedback (Scott, 1962).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Scott, 1962 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Javadi et al. report a marginally different switching probability after correctly punished trials, similar to our study.

    “Interestingly, the authors report a marginally different switching probability after correctly punished trials—similar as in our study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The study was approved by the local ethics committee and written informed consent was obtained from all adult participants and from adolescent participants and their parents.

    “The study was approved by the local ethics committee and all adult participants gave written informed consent. For the adolescent group, the participants and their parents signed the consent form.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Previous studies found differential activations between adolescents and adults in striatal areas, but another study did not replicate that finding and instead found differences in connectivity between ventromedial prefrontal cortex and ventral striatum.

    “While Cohen et al. (2010) found differential activations between adolescents and adults in striatal areas, van den Bos et al. (2012) were not able to replicate that finding, but found differences in the connectivity between the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and the ventral striatum.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cohen et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites van den Bos et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous studies found developmental effects in the anterior insula during tasks of cognitive flexibility and in other cognitive domains.

    “Previous studies found developmental effects during tasks of cognitive flexibility (e.g., Christakou et al., 2009; Rubia et al., 2006; Smith et al., 2011) and in other cognitive domains (Christakou et al., 2011; Jarcho et al., 2012; Keulers et al., 2011; Masten et al., 2009; Somerville et al., 2011; Van Leijenhorst et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Christakou et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Rubia et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Smith et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Increased insular activity, especially to negative reward prediction errors, might indicate that adolescents weight emotional information more strongly, leading to faster adaptation from negative feedbacks.

    “The increased insular activity (esp. to negative RPEs) might indicate that adolescents weight the emotional information more strongly which then leads to a faster adaptation from negative feedbacks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The dorsomedial prefrontal cortex is mainly involved in processing cognitive aspects, whereas the anterior insula processes visceral and emotional information.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Javadi et al. did not find any reward prediction error differences in the anterior cingulate, ventral striatum and vmPFC, similar to our study.

    “Similar as in our study, they did not find any RPE differences in these areas.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula has been ascribed a wide variety of functions from processing visceral and emotional information to controlling attention and task demands.

    “Unsurprisingly, the aIns has been ascribed to a wide variety of functions from processing visceral and emotional information (Critchley, 2005) to controlling attention and task demands (Dosenbach et al., 2006, 2007; Nelson et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Critchley, 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Dosenbach et al., 2006, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Nelson et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula is involved when a feedback is processed consciously.

    “This is also in line with the assumption that the aIns is involved when a feedback is processed consciously (Nelson et al., 2010; Wheeler et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Nelson et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wheeler et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Anterior insula activity often coincides with activation in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex.

    “It is well known that aIns activity often coincides with activation in the dmPFC (cf. Hauser et al., 2014a, 2014b; Nelson et al., 2010; Seymour et al., 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Hauser et al., 2014a, 2014b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Nelson et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Seymour et al., 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Adolescents are more sensitive to the presence of peers.

    “Adolescents are known to be more sensitive to the presence of peers (Chein et al., 2011) and peer rejection (Masten et al., 2009), and show a markedly increased prevalence in psychiatric disorders, such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse (Kessler et al., 2005, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chein et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    The developmental importance of the anterior insula has largely been neglected.

    “However, the developmental importance of this area has largely been neglected.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula is one of the most commonly activated areas in human neuroimaging studies.

    “The aIns is a central hub in the brain and is one of the most commonly activated areas in human neuroimaging studies (Nelson et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nelson et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula has been associated with processing information about risk.

    “Moreover, the aIns has been associated with processing information about risk (Burke and Tobler, 2011; Ishii et al., 2012; Paulus et al., 2003; Preuschoff et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Burke and Tobler, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ishii et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Paulus et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Several regressors-of-no-interest were entered into the GLM to improve model validity.

    “We additionally entered several regressors-of-no-interest into the GLM to improve model validity: choice values (value of chosen object) as parametric modulator at cue presentation, realignment-derived movement parameters, scan-to-scan movements greater than 1 mm, and cardiac pulsations (http://www.translationalneuromodeling.org/tapas/; Glover et al., 2000; Kasper et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Glover et al., 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kasper et al., 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Reinforcement learning models with anticorrelated valuation fitted this task better than a standard Rescorla-Wagner model in previous work.

    “Given that we have previously shown that reinforcement learning models with anticorrelated valuation fitted this task better than a standard Rescorla–Wagner model (Hauser et al., 2014a), we evaluated the risk-sensitive model with an anticorrelated valuation (RSAV) extension as a third model.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hauser et al., 2014a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    One participant was excluded prior to analysis due to excessive movement (> 2.5 mm scan-to-scan motion).

    “One participant (13.0 y, m) had to be excluded prior to analysis due to excessive movement (> 2.5 mm scan-to-scan motion).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula has a high predictive value for task switching in a similar cognitive flexibility task.

    “it has a high predictive value for task switching in a similar cognitive flexibility task (Hampton and O'Doherty, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hampton and O'Doherty, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Adolescents are more sensitive to peer rejection.

    “Adolescents are known to be more sensitive to the presence of peers (Chein et al., 2011) and peer rejection (Masten et al., 2009), and show a markedly increased prevalence in psychiatric disorders, such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse (Kessler et al., 2005, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Masten et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Javadi et al. did not report any analysis of the anterior insula.

    “Unfortunately, the authors did not report any analysis of the aIns.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    There was no difference in movement between the adolescent and adult groups during scanning.

    “During scanning, there was no difference in movement between both groups (scan-to-scan movement: adults: mean = .079 mm ± .021; adolescents: mean = .076 mm ± .016; t(34) = .496, p = .623).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula is activated in a wide variety of cognitive and emotional tasks and forms the important salience network in resting state literature.

    “It is activated in a wide variety of cognitive and emotional tasks (Dosenbach et al., 2006) and forms the important salience network in resting state literature (Menon and Uddin, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dosenbach et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Menon and Uddin, 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula has been associated with depression, anxiety or substance abuse.

    “It has also been associated with depression, anxiety or substance abuse (for reviews cf. Craig, 2009; Naqvi and Bechara, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Craig, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Naqvi and Bechara, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula is involved in social rejection.

    “It is strongly involved in empathy-related processes (Singer et al., 2004, 2009) and social rejection (Masten et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Masten et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The anterior insula is strongly involved in empathy-related processes.

    “It is strongly involved in empathy-related processes (Singer et al., 2004, 2009) and social rejection (Masten et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Singer et al., 2004, 2009

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Adolescents show a markedly increased prevalence in psychiatric disorders such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse.

    “Adolescents are known to be more sensitive to the presence of peers (Chein et al., 2011) and peer rejection (Masten et al., 2009), and show a markedly increased prevalence in psychiatric disorders, such as anxiety, depression or substance abuse (Kessler et al., 2005, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kessler et al., 2005, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Increased insular sensitivity to negative reward prediction errors might affect not only decision making but also other areas in which adolescence is a unique period, such as social interactions or psychiatric disorders.

    “Therefore, an increased insular sensitivity to negative RPEs might not only affect decision making, but also other areas in which adolescence reflects a unique period, such as in social interactions or psychiatric disorders.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Reward prediction error-like signals reflect a general neural update signal in a variety of domains, not only in decision making.
32 of 32

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The adolescent and adult groups did not differ on unmeasured variables that could confound the comparison of RPE processing.

    “The adolescent group consisted of 19 participants between 12 and 16 years (14.7 y ± 1.3, 10 females). The adult group consisted of 17 participants between 20 and 29 years (25.6 y ± 2.4, 10 females).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The dorsomedial prefrontal cortex is mainly involved in processing cognitive aspects, whereas the anterior insula processes visceral and emotional information.

    “However, it is assumed that the dmPFC is mainly involved in processing cognitive aspects, whereas the aIns rather processes visceral and emotional information (Nelson et al., 2010).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Reward prediction error-like signals reflect a general neural update signal in a variety of domains, not only in decision making.

    “RPE-like signals are assumed to reflect a general neural update signal in a variety of domains, not only in decision making (Friston, 2010; Iglesias et al., 2013).”
3 of 3

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?

  • Adolescents learn faster from negative reward prediction errors than adults and recruit the right AI more during probabilistic reversal learning.

    “These asymmetries are evident in studies demonstrating that adolescents learn faster from negative reward prediction errors than adults, and recruit the right AI to a greater degree during probabilistic reversal learning89.”

    From Cognitive and behavioural flexibility: Neural mechanisms and clinical considerations (2021) · cites this paper as [89]

  • During a probabilistic reversal learning task requiring cognitive flexibility, the right anterior insular cortex shows increased task-related responses to negative reward prediction errors in adolescents compared with adults.

    “During a probabilistic reversal learning task requiring cognitive flexibility, the right anterior insular cortex (rAI) shows increased task-related responses to negative reward prediction errors in adolescents compared with adults (53).”

    From Brain Mechanisms Supporting Flexible Cognition and Behavior in Adolescents With Autism Spectrum Disorder (2021) · cites this paper as [53]

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • Inconsistent p-value: F(2,34) = 4.60, p = .013

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .013 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .017. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p = .013 · recomputed p = .017

1 of 1

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upF(2, 34) = 4.6reported p = .013 · recomputed p = .017

    “F(2,34) = 4.60, p = .013”

  • Consistentt(34) = 0.496reported p = .623 · recomputed p = .623

    “t(34) = .496, p = .623”

  • Consistentt(34) = 0.64reported p = .527 · recomputed p = .526

    “t(34) = .64, p = .527”

  • Consistentt(34) = 0.7reported p = .49 · recomputed p = .489

    “t(34) = .70, p = .490”

  • Consistentt(34) = 0.296reported p = .769 · recomputed p = .769

    “t(34) = .296, p = .769”

  • Consistentt(34) = -0.965reported p = .341 · recomputed p = .341

    “t(34) = − .965, p = .341”

  • Consistentt(34) = 1.71reported p = .097 · recomputed p = .096

    “t(34) = 1.71, p = .097”

  • ConsistentF(4, 136) = 73.45reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(4,136) = 73.45, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(4, 136) = 2.851reported p = .026 · recomputed p = .026

    “F(4,136) = 2.851, p = .026”

  • Consistentt(34) = -2.816reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .008

    “t(34) = − 2.816, p = .04”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • Consistentt(34) = -1.336reported p = .95 · recomputed p = .190

    “t(34) = − 1.336, p = .95”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • Consistentt(34) = -0.581reported p = 1 · recomputed p = .565

    “t(34) = − .581, p = 1.00”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • Consistentt(34) = -0.636reported p = 1 · recomputed p = .529

    “t(34) = − .636, p = 1.00”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • Consistentt(34) = 1.595reported p = .6 · recomputed p = .120

    “t(34) = 1.595, p = .60”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • ConsistentF(2, 34) = 40.37reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(2,34) = 40.37, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 34) = 1.77reported p = .193 · recomputed p = .192

    “F(1,34) = 1.77, p = .193”

  • Consistentt(34) = -4.08reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(34) = − 4.08, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(34) = 1.18reported p = .734 · recomputed p = .246

    “t(34) = 1.18, p = .734”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

  • Consistentt(34) = 2.06reported p = .142 · recomputed p = .047

    “t(34) = 2.06, p = .142”

    The paper states a correction for multiple tests

19 of 19

Self-check

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

  • Incorrect denominator degrees of freedom for the RPE-bin ANOVA

    Minor

    With 36 participants in two groups and three RPE bins, the within-subject RPE effect and group-by-RPE interaction should have denominator degrees of freedom of 2 × (36 − 2) = 68, not 34. The paper reports 34 for both tests.

    Reported 34 · recomputed 68

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hauser, T. U., Iannaccone, R., Walitza, S., Brandeis, D., & Brem, S.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Hauser, Tobias U.
ORCID
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-01
Volume
104
Pages
347-354
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.018
PMC
PMC4330550
OpenAlex
W2088333881
Semantic Scholar
8130c15ff61aa1abdd0d9c20356489a71c12290d
Cited by
203
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7
FWCI
5.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • Swiss National Science Foundation (320030_130237, 151641)
  • Hartmann Müller Foundation (1460)
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
cognitive flexibility, adolescence, reward prediction error, adaptive decision-making, probabilistic reversal learning, risk-sensitive reinforcement learning, anterior insula, neural development, computational modeling
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Brain, Brain Mapping, Child, Cognition, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Learning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Reward

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

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