Cited by 454Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Mechanisms underlying cortical activity during value-guided choice

Open access
Hunt, Laurence T, Kolling, Nils, Soltani, Alireza, Woolrich, Mark W, Rushworth, Matthew F S, Behrens, Timothy E J·2012·Nature Neuroscience

Abstract

When choosing between two options, correlates of their value are represented in neural activity throughout the brain. Whether these representations reflect activity that is fundamental to the computational process of value comparison, as opposed to other computations covarying with value, is unknown. We investigated activity in a biophysically plausible network model that transforms inputs relating to value into categorical choices. A set of characteristic time-varying signals emerged that reflect value comparison. We tested these model predictions using magnetoencephalography data recorded from human subjects performing value-guided decisions. Parietal and prefrontal signals matched closely with model predictions. These results provide a mechanistic explanation of neural signals recorded during value-guided choice and a means of distinguishing computational roles of different cortical regions whose activity covaries with value.

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 · 10.1038/nn.3017

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • Prior work has established that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) plays a central role in computing the value of potential choice options, with activity in this region reflecting the dynamic evolution of a value comparison.

    “Prior work has established that the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) plays a central role in computing the value of potential choice options1-5, with activity in this region reflecting the dynamic evolution of a value comparison6.”

    From Confidence in value-based choice (2013) · cites this paper as [6]

  • Given that both difference in value and confidence had independent effects on vmPFC activity, this result provides convergent support for the idea that vmPFC acts as a dynamic accumulator of choice values.

    “Given that both difference in value and confidence had independent effects on vmPFC activity, this result provides convergent support for the idea that vmPFC acts as a dynamic accumulator of choice values6.”

    From Confidence in value-based choice (2013) · cites this paper as [6]

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: 1

  1. [1]von Neumann J Morgenstern O Theory of games and economic behavior 1944 Princeton University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hunt, L. T., Kolling, N., Soltani, A., Woolrich, M. W., Rushworth, M. F. S., & Behrens, T. E. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Hunt, Laurence T
  • Behrens, Timothy E J
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Published
2012-01-08
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
470-476
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
OpenAlex
W2147479622
Cited by
454
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 15
FWCI
19.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (091593, 080540, 088312)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
decision-making, value comparison, reciprocal inhibition, prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, cortical activity, computational modeling
MeSH terms
Biophysics, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Choice Behavior, Contingent Negative Variation, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Models, Neurological, Neural Pathways, Photic Stimulation, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Magnetoencephalography, Linear Models

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