Cited by 1,121Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Should I stay or should I go? How the human brain manages the trade-off between exploitation and exploration

Open access
Cohen, Jonathan D, McClure, Samuel M, Yu, Angela J·2007·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences

Abstract

Many large and small decisions we make in our daily lives-which ice cream to choose, what research projects to pursue, which partner to marry-require an exploration of alternatives before committing to and exploiting the benefits of a particular choice. Furthermore, many decisions require re-evaluation, and further exploration of alternatives, in the face of changing needs or circumstances. That is, often our decisions depend on a higher level choice: whether to exploit well known but possibly suboptimal alternatives or to explore risky but potentially more profitable ones. How adaptive agents choose between exploitation and exploration remains an important and open question that has received relatively limited attention in the behavioural and brain sciences. The choice could depend on a number of factors, including the familiarity of the environment, how quickly the environment is likely to change and the relative value of exploiting known sources of reward versus the cost of reducing uncertainty through exploration. There is no known generally optimal solution to the exploration versus exploitation problem, and a solution to the general case may indeed not be possible. However, there have been formal analyses of the optimal policy under constrained circumstances. There have also been specific suggestions of how humans and animals may respond to this problem under particular experimental conditions as well as proposals about the brain mechanisms involved. Here, we provide a brief review of this work, discuss how exploration and exploitation may be mediated in the brain and highlight some promising future directions for research.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2007.2098

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • The learning rate β depends on global task properties such as volatility or uncertainty and is suggested to be modulated by noradrenergic inputs.

    “This rate depends on global task properties such as the volatility or uncertainty of a given task, and has been suggested to be modulated by noradrenergic inputs (Cohen et al., 2007; Nassar et al., 2012).”

    From Attention, learning, and the value of information (2012) · cites this paper as Cohen et al., 2007

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: 3

  1. Aston-Jones G, Rajkowski J, Lu W, Zhu Y, Cohen J.D, Morecraft R.J. Prominent projections from the orbital prefrontal cortex to the locus coeruleus in monkeys. Soc. Neurosci. Abstr. 2002;28:86–89. [Google Scholar]
  2. Gittins J.C, Jones D.M. A dynamic allocation index for the sequential design of experiments. In: Gans J, editor. Progress in statisics. North-Holland; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 1974. pp. 241–266. [Google Scholar]
  3. Rajkowski J, Lu W, Zhu Y, Cohen J.D, Aston-Jones G. Prominent projections from the anterior cingulate cortex to the locus coeruleus in Rhesus monkey. Soc. Neurosci. Abstr. 2000;26:838.15. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cohen, J. D., McClure, S. M., & Yu, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Cohen, Jonathan D
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences
Published
2007-03-29
Volume
362
Issue
1481
Pages
933-942
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2134243390
Cited by
1,121
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 79 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 77 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 42
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TUbilio (Technical University of Darmstadt) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH-062196, MH65214, F32MH072141, P50MH062196, T32MH065214)
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 › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
exploration-exploitation balance, decision-making, risk-taking, uncertainty, reward, neural mechanisms, adaptive behavior, optimal control, environmental change, familiarity
MeSH terms
Brain, Decision Making, Exploratory Behavior, Humans

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