Cited by 27Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural dynamics and brain function

Medial Frontal Cortex Activity Predicts Information Sampling in Economic Choice

Open access
Kaanders, Paula, Nili, Hamed, O'Reilly, Jill X., Hunt, Laurence·2021·The Journal of Neuroscience

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Decision-making not only requires agents to decide what to choose but also how much information to sample before committing to a choice. Previously established frameworks for economic choice argue for a deliberative process of evidence accumulation across time. These tacitly acknowledge a role of information sampling in that decisions are only made once sufficient evidence is acquired, yet few experiments have explicitly placed information sampling under the participant9s control. Here, we use fMRI to investigate the neural basis of information sampling in economic choice by allowing participants (n = 30, sex not recorded) to actively sample information in a multistep decision task. We show that medial frontal cortex (MFC) activity is predictive of further information sampling before choice. Choice difficulty (inverse value difference, keeping sensory difficulty constant) was also encoded in MFC, but this effect was explained away by the inclusion of information sampling as a coregressor in the general linear model. A distributed network of regions across the prefrontal cortex encoded key features of the sampled information at the time it was presented. We propose that MFC is an important controller of the extent to which information is gathered before committing to an economic choice. This role may explain why MFC activity has been associated with evidence accumulation in previous studies in which information sampling was an implicit rather than explicit feature of the decision. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The decisions we make are determined by the information we have sampled before committing to a choice. Accumulator frameworks of decision-making tacitly acknowledge the need to sample further information during the evidence accumulation process until a decision boundary is reached. However, relatively few studies explicitly place this decision to sample further information under the participant9s control. In this fMRI study, we find that MFC activity is related to information sampling decisions in a multistep economic choice task. This suggests that an important role of evidence representations within MFC may be to guide adaptive sequential decisions to sample further information before committing to a final decision.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.0392-21.2021

Cites

81 of 81 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaanders, P., Nili, H., O'Reilly, J. X., & Hunt, L.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Kaanders, Paula
  • Hunt, Laurence
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2021-08-19
Volume
41
Issue
40
Pages
8403-8413
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W3193487652
Cited by
27
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (208789, 208789/Z/17/Z, Z/17/Z, 215350/Z/19/Z)
  • Royal Society (208789/Z/17/Z, Z/17/Z)
  • Medical Research Council (MR/L019639/1, MR/T031344/1)
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 › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
information sampling, economic choice, medial frontal cortex, evidence accumulation, sequential decision making, prefrontal cortex, decision difficulty, decision boundaries
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Choice Behavior, Female, Forecasting, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Photic Stimulation, Reward, Prefrontal Cortex, Young Adult, Economics, Behavioral

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