A neural correlate of strategic exploration at the onset of adolescence
Open accessAbstract
The onset of adolescence is associated with an increase in the behavioral tendency to explore and seek novel experiences. However, this exploration has rarely been quantified, and its neural correlates during this period remain unclear. Previously, activity within specific regions of the rostrolateral PFC (rlPFC) in adults has been shown to correlate with the tendency for exploration. Here we investigate a recently developed task to assess individual differences in strategic exploration, defined as the degree to which the relative uncertainty of rewards directs responding toward less well-evaluated choices, in 62 girls aged 11-13 years from whom resting state fMRI data were obtained in a separate session. Behaviorally, this task divided our participants into groups of explorers (n = 41) and nonexplorers (n = 21). When seed ROIs within the rlPFC were used to interrogate resting state fMRI data, we identified a lateralized connection between the rlPFC and posterior putamen/insula whose strength differentiated explorers from nonexplorers. On the basis of Granger causality analyses, the preponderant direction of influence may proceed from posterior to anterior. Together, these data provide initial evidence concerning the neural basis of exploratory tendencies at the onset of adolescence.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In a focused sample of girls aged 11-13, no association was found between age or pubertal development and propensity for strategic exploration.
“Within a focused sample of girls ranging from 11–13 years, no association was found between age or pubertal development and propensity for strategic exploration (Kayser et al., 2015).”
From Does puberty mark a transition in sensitive periods for plasticity in the associative neocortex? (2017) · cites this paper as Kayser et al., 2015
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 15
- Authors
- Kayser, A. S., Op de Macks, Z., Dahl, R. E., & Frank, M. J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- 3University of California, Berkeley
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2016-02-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 199-209
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W1751872998
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 1.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- escholarship.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychological and Educational Research Studies
- Keywords
- strategic exploration, adolescence, rostrolateral prefrontal cortex, resting-state functional connectivity, posterior putamen, posterior insula, individual differences, reward uncertainty, Granger causality
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Brain, Brain Mapping, Child, Choice Behavior, Exploratory Behavior, Female, Humans, Individuality, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Reaction Time, Rest, Reward, Multivariate Analysis, Uncertainty, Adolescent Development
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