Self-Control as Value-Based Choice

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 422-428

  Berkman, Elliot T ^a   Hutcherson, Cendri A ^b,c   Livingston, Jordan L ^a   Kahn, Lauren E ^a   Inzlicht, Michael ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

dual process models; goals; health behavior; intervention; neuroscience; self control; self regulation; value based choice

Indexed keywords

EID: 85032669629     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721417704394     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Hare T. A., Camerer C. F., Rangel A., (2009). Self-control in decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation system. Science, 324, 646–648. One of the first papers to demonstrate the role of the vmPFC in self-control. Provides evidence that lateral prefrontal regions influence self-control by modulating an integrated value signal rather than by inhibiting subcortical emotion or reward regions.
2. Hutcherson C., Bushong B., Rangel A., (2015). A neurocomputational model of altruistic choice and its implications. Neuron, 87, 451–462. Develops a computational model of altruism that accurately predicts choice, response time, and neural activity. The model suggests that many patterns of data interpreted as evidence for dual-process (e.g., intuitive versus deliberative) systems, including RT, response to time pressure, and neural response, can be explained by a simpler value computation.
3. Polanía R., Krajbich I., Grueschow M., Ruff C. C., (2014). Neural oscillations and synchronization differentially support evidence accumulation in perceptual and value-based decision making. Neuron, 82, 709–720. An empirical article illustrating how brain activity (measured here with electroencephalography) can be characterized using evidence accumulator models. The paper also shows how different types of choices (e.g., perceptual versus value-based) integrate different sources of evidence.
4. Ratcliff R., Smith P. L., Brown S. D., McKoon G., (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 260–281. An accessible overview of a variety of sequential sampling models, including drift-diffusion models, that describes their features, compares them to each other, and reviews how they have been used in psychological research.
5. Shenhav A., Musslick S., Lieder F., Kool W., Griffiths T. L., Cohen J. D., Botvinick M. M., (in press). Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort. Annual Review of Neuroscience. A detailed review of the psychological and neuroscientific literatures on the experienced effort costs of cognitive control. Summarizes potential causes of effort costs, such as opportunity costs and storage and processing limits, and describes computational models of effort allocation.
6. Basten U., Biele G., Heekeren H. R., Fiebach C. J., (2010). How the brain integrates costs and benefits during decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 107, 21767–21772.
7. Boureau Y.- L., Sokol-Hessner P., Daw N. D., (2015). Deciding how to decide: Self-control and meta-decision making. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 700–710.
8. Busemeyer J. R., Townsend J. T., (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432–459.
9. Clithero J. A., Rangel A., (2014). Informatic parcellation of the network involved in the computation of subjective value. Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, 9, 1289–1302.
10. Deci E. L., Ryan R. M., (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
11. Duckworth A. L., Gendler T. S., Gross J. J., (2016). Situational strategies for self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 35–55.
12. Dunn T. L., Inzlicht M., Risko E. F., (2017, February 17). Determinants of effort: Effort-based choices are associated with error-likelihood, not time demand. Retrieved from https://researchgate.net/publication/309386517_Determinants_of_Effort_Effort-based_Choices_are_Associated_with_Error-Likelihood_not_Time_Demand
13. Dunn T. L., Lutes D. J., Risko E. F., (2016). Metacognitive evaluation in the avoidance of demand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 1372–1387.
14. Fujita K. K., (2011). On conceptualizing self-control as more than the effortful inhibition of impulses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 352–366.
15. Hare T. A., Malmaud J., Rangel A., (2011). Focusing attention on the health aspects of foods changes value signals in vmPFC and improves dietary choice. Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 11077–11087.
16. Heatherton T. F., Wagner D. D., (2011). Cognitive neuroscience of self-regulation failure. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 132–139.
17. Hofmann W., Friese M., Strack F., (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dual-systems perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 162–176.
18. Hofmann W., Schmeichel B. J., Baddeley A. D., (2012). Executive functions and self-regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 174–180.
19. Hutcherson C. A., Bushong B., Rangel A., (2015). A neurocomputational model of altruistic choice and its implications. Neuron, 87(2), 451–462.
20. Hutcherson C. A., Montaser-Kouhsari L., Woodward J., Rangel A., (2015). Emotional and utilitarian appraisals of moral dilemmas are encoded in separate areas and integrated in ventromedial prefrontal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 12593–12605.
21. Inzlicht M., Berkman E. T., (2015). Six questions for the resource model of control (and some answers). Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 9(10), 511–524.
22. Inzlicht M., Bartholow B. D., Hirsh J. B., (2015). Emotional foundations of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 126–132.
23. Inzlicht M., Schmeichel B. J., Macrae C. N., (2014). Why self-control seems (but may not be) limited. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 127–133.
24. Kable J. W., Glimcher P. W., (2007). The neural correlates of subjective value during intertemporal choice. Nature Neuroscience, 10(12), 1625–1633.
25. Kahneman D., (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
26. Kahneman D., Tversky A., (1984). Values, choices and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.
27. Kahneman D., Knetsch J. L., Thaler R. H., (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 193–206.
28. Kelley W. M., Wagner D. D., Heatherton T. F., (2015). In search of a human self-regulation system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 38, 389–411.
29. Keren G., Schul Y., (2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 533–550.
30. Kiani R., Corthell L., Shadlen M. N., (2014). Choice certainty is informed by both evidence and decision time. Neuron, 84, 1329–1342.
31. Kool W., McGuire J. T., Wang G. J., Botvinick M. M., (2013). Neural and behavioral evidence for an intrinsic cost of self-control. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e72626. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0072626
32. Krajbich I., Armel C., Rangel A., (2010). Visual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice. Nature Neuroscience, 13, 1292–1298.
33. Kurzban R., Duckworth A., Kable J. W., Myers J., (2013). An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. The Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 36, 661–679.
34. Marcora S., (2009). Perception of effort during exercise is independent of afferent feedback from skeletal muscles, heart, and lungs. Journal of Applied Physiology, 106, 2060–2062.
35. Marr D., Poggio T., (1976). From understanding computation to understanding neural circuitry. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
36. McClure S. M., Laibson D. I., Loewenstein G., Cohen J. D., (2004). Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306, 503–507.
37. McGuire J. T., Kable J. W., (2015). Medial prefrontal cortical activity reflects dynamic re-evaluation during voluntary persistence. Nature Neuroscience, 18, 760–766.
38. Milyavskaya M., Inzlicht M., (in press). What’s so great about self-control? Examining the importance of effortful self-control and temptation in predicting real-life depletion and goal attainment. Social Psychological & Personality Science. doi:10.1177/1948550616679237
39. Ratcliff R., Frank M. J., (2012). Reinforcement-based decision making in corticostriatal circuits: Mutual constraints by neurocomputational and diffusion models. Neural Computation, 24, 1186–1229.
40. Resulaj A., Kiani R., Wolpert D. M., Shadlen M. N., (2009). Changes of mind in decision-making. Nature, 461, 263–266.
41. Shenhav A., Musslick S., Lieder F., Kool W., Griffiths T. L., Cohen J. D., Botvinick M. M., (in press). Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort. Annual Review of Neuroscience. Retrieved from http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031526
42. Shenhav A., Cohen J. D., Botvinick M. M., (2016). Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control. Nature Neuroscience, 19, 1286–1291.
43. Strait C. E., Blanchard T. C., Hayden B. Y., (2014). Reward value comparison via mutual inhibition in ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Neuron, 82, 1357–1366.
44. Westbrook A., Braver T. S., (2015). Cognitive effort: A neuroeconomic approach. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 15, 395–415.