The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Separate Neural Mechanisms Underlie Choices and Strategic Preferences in Risky Decision Making
Open accessAbstract
Adaptive decision making in real-world contexts often relies on strategic simplifications of decision problems. Yet, the neural mechanisms that shape these strategies and their implementation remain largely unknown. Using an economic decision-making task, we dissociate brain regions that predict specific choices from those predicting an individual's preferred strategy. Choices that maximized gains or minimized losses were predicted by functional magnetic resonance imaging activation in ventromedial prefrontal cortex or anterior insula, respectively. However, choices that followed a simplifying strategy (i.e., attending to overall probability of winning) were associated with activation in parietal and lateral prefrontal cortices. Dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, through differential functional connectivity with parietal and insular cortex, predicted individual variability in strategic preferences. Finally, we demonstrate that robust decision strategies follow from neural sensitivity to rewards. We conclude that decision making reflects more than compensatory interaction of choice-related regions; in addition, specific brain systems potentiate choices depending on strategies, traits, and context.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Indeed, activity in the AIC is a common feature in studies of cognitive control and inhibitory processing [7, 46–50] and reward sensitivity [8, 9].”
From The role of the anterior insula in adolescent decision making (2014) · cites this paper as [47]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Brainard, D. H. (1997) · Spatial Vision · doi:10.1163/156856897x00357 · Cited by 20,012
Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00122574 · Cited by 15,467
Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL
Smith, S. M., Jenkinson, M., Woolrich, M. W., Beckmann, C. F., Behrens, T. E. J., Johansen-Berg, H., Bannister, P. R., De Luca, M., Drobnjak, I., Flitney, D. E., et al. (2004) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051 · Cited by 13,630
The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies
Pelli, D. G. (1997) · Spatial Vision · doi:10.1163/156856897x00366 · Cited by 11,110
A neural substrate of prediction and reward
Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 · Cited by 9,388
Conflict monitoring and cognitive control
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624 · Cited by 7,351
Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality.
Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.4.650 · Cited by 3,504
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173933 · Cited by 3,487
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors
Daw, N. D., Gershman, S. J., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.027 · Cited by 1,779
Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain’s reward circuitry
Chein, J., Albert, D., O’Brien, L., Uckert, K., & Steinberg, L. (2011) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01035.x · Cited by 1,180
Cognitive effort: A neuroeconomic approach
Westbrook, A., & Braver, T. S. (2015) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-015-0334-y · Cited by 685
Consumer Neuroscience: Applications, Challenges, and Possible Solutions
Plaßmann, H., Venkatraman, V., Huettel, S. A., & Yoon, C. (2015) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmr.14.0048 · Cited by 517
Self-citationMohr, P. N. C., Biele, G., & Heekeren, H. R. (2010) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0003-10.2010 · Cited by 411
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatraman, V., Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Huettel, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Huettel, Scott A.
- Venue
- Neuron
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 593-602
- ISSN
- 0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3213208
- OpenAlex
- W2151417045
- Cited by
- 222
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 9.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/ (vor, 1538 d)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-017 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-037 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-012 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-029 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-004 (stm-asf)
- Locations
- Neuron (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Public Health Service (NIMH-70685, NINDS 41328)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH070685)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P01NS041328)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- risky decision making, strategic preferences, decision strategies, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, anterior insula, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, lateral prefrontal cortex, functional connectivity, individual differences, reward sensitivity
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Choice Behavior, Female, Gambling, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Individuality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Predictive Value of Tests, Probability, Reward, Risk-Taking, Logistic Models, Young Adult
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
