Cited by 171Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMemory and Neural MechanismsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

A critical review of habit learning and the basal ganglia

Open access
Seger, Carol A., Spiering, Brian J.·2011·Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience

Abstract

The current paper briefly outlines the historical development of the concept of habit learning and discusses its relationship to the basal ganglia. Habit learning has been studied in many different fields of neuroscience using different species, tasks, and methodologies, and as a result it has taken on a wide range of definitions from these various perspectives. We identify five common but not universal, definitional features of habit learning: that it is inflexible, slow or incremental, unconscious, automatic, and insensitive to reinforcer devaluation. We critically evaluate for each of these how it has been defined, its utility for research in both humans and non-human animals, and the evidence that it serves as an accurate description of basal ganglia function. In conclusion, we propose a multi-faceted approach to habit learning and its relationship to the basal ganglia, emphasizing the need for formal definitions that will provide directions for future research.

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 · 10.3389/fnsys.2011.00066

Cites

96 of 99 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?

  • Behaviours that are repeated many times become governed by different regions of the brain, making them more resistant to change.

    “Neuroscientists have also shown how behaviours which are repeated many times become governed by different regions of the brain, making them more resistant to change (Seger & Spiering, 2011).”

    From Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: a critical review (2021) · cites this paper as Seger & Spiering, 2011

    The review links continued practice to changes in basal-ganglia activity (Slow or incremental) and associates habitual action with different neural circuits and reduced flexibility (Conclusion; Inflexible). But the Conclusion presents a transfer of behavioral control across brain systems as one proposed account, not a demonstrated outcome for behaviours generally. The claim overstates how firmly the review establishes that repetition causes such a shift. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Experiential memory parallels human nondeclarative memory, specifically the procedural and habit systems.

    “Theoretically grounded in cognitive science, this paradigm parallels human nondeclarative memory , specifically the procedural and habit systems (Squire, 2004; Seger and Spiering, 2011).”

    From Memory in the Age of AI Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Seger and Spiering, 2011

  • The fast and involuntary character of habits renders them relatively impervious to cognitive and inhibitory control.

    “The fast and involuntary character of habits, which require limited thought to be performed, renders them relatively impervious to cognitive and inhibitory control [10 -15].”

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: 1

  1. Lashley K. S. (1950). “In search of the engram,” in Society of Experimental Biology Symposium, Vol. 4 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 454– 480

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seger, C. A., & Spiering, B. J.
Affiliations
Colorado State University (US)
Corresponding author
Seger, Carol A.
Venue
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
Published
2011
Volume
5
Pages
66-66
ISSN
1662-5137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093599061
Cited by
170
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 15
FWCI
6.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH079182)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
habit learning, basal ganglia, unconscious behavior, automatism, reinforcer devaluation, basal ganglia function

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