Model-based learning protects against forming habits
Open accessAbstract
Studies in humans and rodents have suggested that behavior can at times be "goal-directed"-that is, planned, and purposeful-and at times "habitual"-that is, inflexible and automatically evoked by stimuli. This distinction is central to conceptions of pathological compulsion, as in drug abuse and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Evidence for the distinction has primarily come from outcome devaluation studies, in which the sensitivity of a previously learned behavior to motivational change is used to assay the dominance of habits versus goal-directed actions. However, little is known about how habits and goal-directed control arise. Specifically, in the present study we sought to reveal the trial-by-trial dynamics of instrumental learning that would promote, and protect against, developing habits. In two complementary experiments with independent samples, participants completed a sequential decision task that dissociated two computational-learning mechanisms, model-based and model-free. We then tested for habits by devaluing one of the rewards that had reinforced behavior. In each case, we found that individual differences in model-based learning predicted the participants' subsequent sensitivity to outcome devaluation, suggesting that an associative mechanism underlies a bias toward habit formation in healthy individuals.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Habit formation is blocked while model-based learning is predominant, suggesting inhibitory mechanisms of goal-directed strategy on habitual strategy.
“Moreover, human studies have shown that habit formation is blocked while model-based learning is predominant, suggesting inhibitory mechanisms of the goal-directed strategy on the habitual strategy43.”
From Dissociable roles of prefrontal plasticity in decision-making strategy and execution of habitual behavior (2026) · cites this paper as [43]
The Abstract (page not specified) reports that stronger model-based learning predicted later sensitivity to outcome devaluation, and Experiment 1 Results report an absence of model-based learning among participants who formed habits. This supports a protective association, but not the stronger claim that model-based learning blocks habit formation. The Discussion presents effortful overriding of habits as a possibility, not an established inhibitory mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 283
- Authors
- Gillan, C. M., Otto, A. R., Phelps, E. A., & Daw, N. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- New York University (US)
- Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gillan, Claire M.
- Venue
- Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
- Published
- 2015-03-24
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 523-536
- ISSN
- 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-135X
- PMC
- PMC4526597
- OpenAlex
- W2007828825
- Cited by
- 283
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 74 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 13.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- model-based learning, model-free learning, habit formation, goal-directed behavior, outcome devaluation, operant conditioning, individual differences, computational models of learning, compulsive behavior, obsessive-compulsive disorder, drug addiction
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Conditioning, Operant, Decision Making, Female, Goals, Habits, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Psychological Tests, Reinforcement, Psychology, Young Adult, Executive 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