Cited by 139Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesBehavioral Health and InterventionsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Habits as action sequences: hierarchical action control and changes in outcome value

Open access
Dezfouli, Amir, Lingawi, Nura W., Balleine, Bernard W.·2014·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Goal-directed action involves making high-level choices that are implemented using previously acquired action sequences to attain desired goals. Such a hierarchical schema is necessary for goal-directed actions to be scalable to real-life situations, but results in decision-making that is less flexible than when action sequences are unfolded and the decision-maker deliberates step-by-step over the outcome of each individual action. In particular, from this perspective, the offline revaluation of any outcomes that fall within action sequence boundaries will be invisible to the high-level planner resulting in decisions that are insensitive to such changes. Here, within the context of a two-stage decision-making task, we demonstrate that this property can explain the emergence of habits. Next, we show how this hierarchical account explains the insensitivity of over-trained actions to changes in outcome value. Finally, we provide new data that show that, under extended extinction conditions, habitual behaviour can revert to goal-directed control, presumably as a consequence of decomposing action sequences into single actions. This hierarchical view suggests that the development of action sequences and the insensitivity of actions to changes in outcome value are essentially two sides of the same coin, explaining why these two aspects of automatic behaviour involve a shared neural structure.

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.2013.0482

Cites

63 of 63 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 arbitrator selects between model-based and model-free systems according to criteria such as accuracy or prediction error or prevailing rate of reinforcement.

    “Given the tradeoff, the arbitrator selects between the two systems according to various criteria, such as the accuracy or prediction error connected with each (Daw et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2014) or the prevailing rate of reinforcement (Dezfouli et al., 2014).”

    From Context, attention, and the switch between habit and goal-direction in behavior (2021) · cites this paper as Dezfouli et al., 2014

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: 2

  1. [3]Dickinson A. 1994. Instrumental conditioning. In Animal cognition and learning (ed. Mackintosh NJ.), pp. 4–79. London, UK: Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. [26]Reason J. 1990. Human error. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dezfouli, A., Lingawi, N. W., & Balleine, B. W.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2014-11-05
Volume
369
Issue
1655
Pages
20130482
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2120101916
Cited by
139
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4
FWCI
5.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH56446)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
habit, action sequences, goal-directed action, outcome value, overtraining, extinction, decision-making, automatism
MeSH terms
Animals, Decision Making, Goals, Habits, Humans, Learning, Rodentia

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