Cited by 174Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

The Neurobiology of Reference-Dependent Value Computation

Open access
De Martino, Benedetto, Kumaran, Dharshan, Holt, Beatrice, Dolan, Raymond J.·2009·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

A key focus of current research in neuroeconomics concerns how the human brain computes value. Although, value has generally been viewed as an absolute measure (e.g., expected value, reward magnitude), much evidence suggests that value is more often computed with respect to a changing reference point, rather than in isolation. Here, we present the results of a study aimed to dissociate brain regions involved in reference-independent (i.e., “absolute”) value computations, from those involved in value computations relative to a reference point. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, subjects acted as buyers and sellers during a market exchange of lottery tickets. At a behavioral level, we demonstrate that subjects systematically accorded a higher value to objects they owned relative to those they did not, an effect that results from a shift in reference point (i.e., status quo bias or endowment effect). Our results show that activity in orbitofrontal cortex and dorsal striatum track parameters such as the expected value of lottery tickets indicating the computation of reference-independent value. In contrast, activity in ventral striatum indexed the degree to which stated prices, at a within-subjects and between-subjects level, were distorted with respect to a reference point. The findings speak to the neurobiological underpinnings of reference dependency during real market value computations.

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.4832-08.2009

Cites

51 of 51 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 Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) mechanism reliably elicits goal values that are used by the decision maker to guide choice.

    “A number of studies have shown that this mechanism reliably elicits goal values that are used by the decision maker to guide choice16-18.”

    From Confidence in value-based choice (2013) · cites this paper as [17]

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. Barto AG Sutton RS Reinforcment learning: an introduction 1998 MIT Cambridge, MA
  2. Dayan P Abbott LF Theoretical neuroscience 2001 MIT Cambridge, MA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Holt, B., & Dolan, R. J.
Affiliations
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2009-03-25
Volume
29
Issue
12
Pages
3833-3842
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2049965297
Cited by
174
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 13
FWCI
12.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (078865)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
reference points, endowment effect, status quo bias, orbitofrontal cortex, dorsal striatum, ventral striatum, expected value, market exchange, lottery tickets, price distortions, neuroeconomics
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Commerce, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Reward, Young Adult

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