Cited by 34Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesBehavioral Health and Interventions

Renewal of goal direction with a context change after habit learning.

Open access
Steinfeld, Michael R., Bouton, Mark E.·2021·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

An instrumental action can be goal-directed after a moderate amount of practice and then convert to habit after more extensive practice. Recent evidence suggests, however, that habits can return to action status after different environmental manipulations. The present experiments therefore asked whether habit learning interferes with goal direction in a context-dependent manner like other types of retroactive interference (e.g., extinction, punishment, counterconditioning). In Experiment 1, rats were given a moderate amount of instrumental training to form an action in one context (Context A) and then more extended training of the same response to form a habit in another context (Context B). We then performed reinforcer devaluation with taste aversion conditioning in both contexts, and tested the response in both contexts. The response remained habitual in Context B, but was goal-directed in Context A, indicating renewal of goal direction after habit learning. Experiment 2 expanded on Experiment 1 by testing the response in a third context (Context C). It found that the habitual response also renewed as action in this context. Together, the results establish a parallel between habit and extinction learning: Conversion to habit does not destroy action knowledge, but interferes with it in a context-specific way. They are also consistent with other results suggesting that habit is specific to the context in which it is learned, whereas goal-direction can transfer between contexts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

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 · 10.1037/bne0000422

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • In another Steinfeld and Bouton (2021) experiment, after action training in Context A and conversion to habit in Context B, with reinforcer devaluation in all three contexts before test, the response retained habit properties in Context B but was expressed as an action in Context C.

    “Here the response retained its habit properties in B, but expressed as an action in Context C.”

    From Context, attention, and the switch between habit and goal-direction in behavior (2021) · cites this paper as Steinfeld & Bouton, 2021

  • In Steinfeld and Bouton's (2021) experiment, after modest lever-press training in Context A and extended training in Context B, reinforcer devaluation in both contexts showed that lever pressing remained a habit in Context B but switched to action in Context A.

    “When the reinforcer was devalued in both contexts, tests demonstrated that lever pressing was still a habit in Context B, but switched to action when tested in Context A (the original action context) (see Fig. 4).”

    From Context, attention, and the switch between habit and goal-direction in behavior (2021) · cites this paper as Steinfeld & Bouton, 2021

  • In ABC renewal experiments, regardless of whether the behavior had been trained as an action or habit in Context A, it renewed as an action in Context C.

    “Remarkably, regardless of whether the behavior had been trained as an action or habit in Context A, it renewed as an action in Context C.”

    From Context, attention, and the switch between habit and goal-direction in behavior (2021) · cites this paper as Steinfeld & Bouton, 2021

  • On the attention-modulation account, the switch back to R-O after unexpected reinforcers or context change would be created by merely increasing attention to R and the consequent associative retrieval of O.

    “On this account, the switch back to R-O after unexpected reinforcers or context change (Bouton et al., 2020; Steinfeld & Bouton, 2021; Trask et al., 2020) would be created by merely increasing attention to R (and the consequent associative retrieval of O).”

    From Context, attention, and the switch between habit and goal-direction in behavior (2021) · cites this paper as Steinfeld & Bouton, 2021

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: 8

  1. Adams CD (1982). Variations in the sensitivity of instrumental responding to reinforcer devaluation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 34, 77– 98.
  2. Adams CD, & Dickinson A (1981). Instrumental responding following reinforcer devaluation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section B, 33, 109– 121.
  3. Colwill RM, & Rescorla RA (1985). Instrumental responding remains sensitive to reinforcer devaluation after extensive training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 520– 536. 2303793
  4. Dickinson A (1985). Actions and habits: the development of behavioural autonomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences, 308, 67– 78.
  5. Dickinson A, & Balleine B (1993). Actions and responses: The dual psychology of behaviour. In Eilan N, McCarthy RA, & Brewer B (Eds.), Spatial representation: Problems in philosophy and psychology (p. 277– 293). Blackwell Publishing.
  6. Dickinson A, Nicholas DJ, & Adams CD (1983). The effect of instrumental training contingency on susceptibility to reinforcer devaluation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 35, 35– 51.
  7. Field A (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  8. Spear NE (1981). Extending the domain of memory retrieval. In Spear NE & Miller RR (Eds.), Information processing in animals: memory mechanisms (pp. 341– 378). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Steinfeld, M. R., & Bouton, M. E.
Affiliations
University of Vermont (US)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2021-02
Volume
135
Issue
1
Pages
79-87
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W3094731038
Cited by
34
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (RO1 DA 033123)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
goal-directed behavior, habit learning, context-dependent learning, reinforcer devaluation, conditioned taste aversion, extinction, operant conditioning, rats, action knowledge, context specificity
MeSH terms
Animals, Extinction, Psychological, Female, Goals, Habits, Learning, Motivation, Rats

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