The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How much of reinforcement learning is working memory, not reinforcement learning? A behavioral, computational, and neurogenetic analysis
Open accessAbstract
Instrumental learning involves corticostriatal circuitry and the dopaminergic system. This system is typically modeled in the reinforcement learning (RL) framework by incrementally accumulating reward values of states and actions. However, human learning also implicates prefrontal cortical mechanisms involved in higher level cognitive functions. The interaction of these systems remains poorly understood, and models of human behavior often ignore working memory (WM) and therefore incorrectly assign behavioral variance to the RL system. Here we designed a task that highlights the profound entanglement of these two processes, even in simple learning problems. By systematically varying the size of the learning problem and delay between stimulus repetitions, we separately extracted WM‐specific effects of load and delay on learning. We propose a new computational model that accounts for the dynamic integration of RL and WM processes observed in subjects’ behavior. Incorporating capacity‐limited WM into the model allowed us to capture behavioral variance that could not be captured in a pure RL framework even if we (implausibly) allowed separate RL systems for each set size. The WM component also allowed for a more reasonable estimation of a single RL process. Finally, we report effects of two genetic polymorphisms having relative specificity for prefrontal and basal ganglia functions. Whereas the COMT gene coding for catechol‐O‐methyl transferase selectively influenced model estimates of WM capacity, the GPR6 gene coding for G‐protein‐coupled receptor 6 influenced the RL learning rate. Thus, this study allowed us to specify distinct influences of the high‐level and low‐level cognitive functions on instrumental learning, beyond the possibilities offered by simple RL models.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A neural substrate of prediction and reward
Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 · Cited by 9,388
Barto, A. G. (1998) · IFAC Proceedings Volumes · doi:10.1016/s1474-6670(17)38315-5 · Cited by 2,976
Daw, N. D., Niv, Y., & Dayan, P. (2005) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1560 · Cited by 2,533
Effect of COMT Val 108/158 Met genotype on frontal lobe function and risk for schizophrenia
Egan, M. F., Goldberg, T. E., Kolachana, B. S., Callicott, J. H., Mazzanti, C. M., Straub, R. E., Goldman, D., & Weinberger, D. R. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.111134598 · Cited by 2,381
Dissociable Roles of Ventral and Dorsal Striatum in Instrumental Conditioning
O'Doherty, J., Dayan, P., Schultz, J., Deichmann, R., Friston, K., & Dolan, R. J. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1094285 · Cited by 2,088
A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning
Montague, P., Dayan, P., & Sejnowski, T. (1996) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.16-05-01936.1996 · Cited by 2,066
Learning the value of information in an uncertain world
Behrens, T. E. J., Woolrich, M. W., Walton, M. E., & Rushworth, M. F. S. (2007) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1954 · Cited by 2,053
Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors
Daw, N. D., Gershman, S. J., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.027 · Cited by 1,779
Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory
Zhang, W., & Luck, S. J. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06860 · Cited by 1,622
Dopamine-dependent prediction errors underpin reward-seeking behaviour in humans
Pessiglione, M., Seymour, B., Flandin, G., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, C. D. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05051 · Cited by 1,584
Cited by
Dolan, R. J., & Dayan, P. (2013) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.09.007 · Cited by 977
Ten simple rules for the computational modeling of behavioral data
Wilson, R. C., & Collins, A. G. (2019) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.49547 · Cited by 710
Self-citationNeurophysiology of performance monitoring and adaptive behavior
Ullsperger, M., Danielmeier, C., & Jocham, G. (2014) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00041.2012 · Cited by 634
Prefrontal cortex as a meta-reinforcement learning system
Wang, J. X., Kurth-Nelson, Z., Kumaran, D., Tirumala, D., Soyer, H., Leibo, J. Z., Hassabis, D., & Botvinick, M. (2018) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-018-0147-8 · Cited by 596
Reinforcement learning and episodic memory in humans and animals: an integrative framework
Gershman, S. J., & Daw, N. D. (2017) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033625 · Cited by 446
Metadata
- Authors
- Collins, A. G. E., & Frank, M. J.
- Venue
- European Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-04
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1024-1035
- ISSN
- 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
- 1460-9568
- OpenAlex
- W2111971565
- Cited by
- 417
- References
- 70
- FWCI
- 7.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How much of reinforcement learning is working memory, not reinforcement learning? A behavioral, computational, and neurogenetic analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011.07980.x
- The paper
- Collins, A. G. E., & Frank, M. J. (2012). How much of reinforcement learning is working memory, not reinforcement learning? A behavioral, computational, and neurogenetic analysis. European Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011.07980.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.