Cited by 356Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Neural prediction errors reveal a risk-sensitive reinforcement-learning process in the human brain

Open access
Niv, Yael, Edlund, Jeffrey A., Dayan, Peter, O'Doherty, John P.·2012·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Humans and animals are exquisitely, though idiosyncratically, sensitive to risk or variance in the outcomes of their actions. Economic, psychological, and neural aspects of this are well studied when information about risk is provided explicitly. However, we must normally learn about outcomes from experience, through trial and error. Traditional models of such reinforcement learning focus on learning about the mean reward value of cues and ignore higher order moments such as variance. We used fMRI to test whether the neural correlates of human reinforcement learning are sensitive to experienced risk. Our analysis focused on anatomically delineated regions of a priori interest in the nucleus accumbens, where blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signals have been suggested as correlating with quantities derived from reinforcement learning. We first provide unbiased evidence that the raw BOLD signal in these regions corresponds closely to a reward prediction error. We then derive from this signal the learned values of cues that predict rewards of equal mean but different variance and show that these values are indeed modulated by experienced risk. Moreover, a close neurometric–psychometric coupling exists between the fluctuations of the experience-based evaluations of risky options that we measured neurally and the fluctuations in behavioral risk aversion. This suggests that risk sensitivity is integral to human learning, illuminating economic models of choice, neuroscientific models of affective learning, and the workings of the underlying neural mechanisms.

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.5498-10.2012

Cites

71 of 71 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
Niv, Y., Edlund, J. A., Dayan, P., & O'Doherty, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit (GB)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2012-01-11
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
551-562
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2033271727
Cited by
356
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 6
FWCI
10.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
  • Gatsby Charitable Foundation
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
risk sensitivity, reinforcement learning, reward prediction error, nucleus accumbens, BOLD signal, risk aversion, decision making under risk, affective learning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Brain, Choice Behavior, Conditioning, Classical, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Models, Psychological, Nucleus Accumbens, Predictive Value of Tests, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward, Risk-Taking, 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