Cited by 1,411Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making

Hsu, Ming, Bhatt, Meghana, Adolphs, Ralph, Tranel, Daniel, Camerer, Colin F.·2005·Science

Abstract

Much is known about how people make decisions under varying levels of probability (risk). Less is known about the neural basis of decision-making when probabilities are uncertain because of missing information (ambiguity). In decision theory, ambiguity about probabilities should not affect choices. Using functional brain imaging, we show that the level of ambiguity in choices correlates positively with activation in the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex, and negatively with a striatal system. Moreover, striatal activity correlates positively with expected reward. Neurological subjects with orbitofrontal lesions were insensitive to the level of ambiguity and risk in behavioral choices. These data suggest a general neural circuit responding to degrees of uncertainty, contrary to decision theory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1115327

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Uncertainty and ambiguity involve modulation of amygdala, prefrontal cortex, and striatum, key nodes of the triadic model.

    “These two dimensions, which characterize most daily life events, have been shown to involve the modulation of amygdala, prefrontal cortex and striatum (e.g., Hsu et al., 2005), the key nodes of the triadic model.”
  • Recent theories of amygdala function argue that the amygdala subserves an abstract function in detecting uncertainty or ambiguity in the environment and in triggering arousal and vigilance as a consequence.

    “recent theories of amygdala function argue that the amygdala subserves an abstract function in detecting uncertainty (13) or ambiguity (14) in the environment and in triggering arousal and vigilance as a consequence.”

    From Amygdala damage eliminates monetary loss aversion (2010) · cites this paper as [14]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsu, M., Bhatt, M., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Camerer, C. F.
Affiliations
California Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Camerer, Colin F.
Venue
Science
Published
2005-12-09
Volume
310
Issue
5754
Pages
1680-1683
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2104346961
Cited by
1,411
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 88 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 68 · 2015: 79 · 2014: 85 · 2013: 85 · 2012: 87
FWCI
29.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH067681)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P01 NS19632, P01NS019632)
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
decision making under ambiguity, risk, uncertainty, amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex, striatum, expected reward, neural basis of choice, functional neuroimaging
MeSH terms
Adult, Amygdala, Brain, Brain Diseases, Brain Mapping, Corpus Striatum, Decision Making, Decision Theory, Female, Frontal Lobe, Games, Experimental, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mental Processes, Probability, Reward, Risk, Confidence Intervals, Likelihood Functions, Uncertainty

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