Cited by 335Embodied and Extended CognitionNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFree Will and Agency

Hierarchical active inference: A theory of motivated control

Open access
Pezzulo, Giovanni, Rigoli, Francesco, Friston, Karl J.·2018·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Motivated control refers to the coordination of behaviour to achieve affectively valenced outcomes or goals. The study of motivated control traditionally assumes a distinction between control and motivational processes, which map to distinct (dorsolateral versus ventromedial) brain systems. However, the respective roles and interactions between these processes remain controversial. We offer a novel perspective that casts control and motivational processes as complementary aspects - goal propagation and prioritization, respectively - of active inference and hierarchical goal processing under deep generative models. We propose that the control hierarchy propagates prior preferences or goals, but their precision is informed by the motivational context, inferred at different levels of the motivational hierarchy. The ensuing integration of control and motivational processes underwrites action and policy selection and, ultimately, motivated behaviour, by enabling deep inference to prioritize goals in a context-sensitive way.

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.tics.2018.01.009

Cites

103 of 103 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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pezzulo, G., Rigoli, F., & Friston, K. J.
Affiliations
  • National Research Council (IT)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Pezzulo, Giovanni
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-04
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
294-306
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2787984105
Cited by
334
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust Principal Research Fellowship (088130/Z/09/Z)
  • HFSP (RGY0088/2014)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
active inference, goal prioritization, deep generative models, motivation, action selection, policy choice
MeSH terms
Humans, Motivation, Perception, Psychological Theory, Thinking, Prefrontal Cortex, Executive Function

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