Behavioral choice can be characterized along two axes. One axis distinguishes reflexive, model-free systems that slowly accumulate values through experience and a model-based system that uses knowledge to reason prospectively. The second axis distinguishes Pavlovian valuation of stimuli from instrumental valuation of actions or stimulus–action pairs. This results in four values and many possible interactions between them, with important consequences for accounts of individual variation. We here explored whether individual variation along one axis was related to individual variation along the other. Specifically, we asked whether individuals' balance between model-based and model-free learning was related to their tendency to show Pavlovian interferences with instrumental decisions. In two independent samples with a total of 243 participants, Pavlovian–instrumental transfer effects were negatively correlated with the strength of model-based reasoning in a two-step task. This suggests a potential common underlying substrate predisposing individuals to both have strong Pavlovian interference and be less model-based and provides a framework within which to interpret the observation of both effects in addiction.

Converging behavioral evidence indicates that temporal discounting, measured by intertemporal choice tasks, is inversely related to intelligence. At the neural level, the parieto-frontal network is pivotal for complex, higher-order cognitive processes. Relatedly, underrecruitment of the pFC during a working memory task has been found to be associated with steeper temporal discounting. Furthermore, this network has also been shown to be related to the consistency of intertemporal choices. Here we report an fMRI study that directly investigated the association of neural correlates of intertemporal choice behavior with intelligence in an adolescent sample ( n = 206; age 13.7–15.5 years). After identifying brain regions where the BOLD response during intertemporal choice was correlated with individual differences in intelligence, we further tested whether BOLD responses in these areas would mediate the associations between intelligence, the discounting rate, and choice consistency. We found positive correlations between BOLD response in a value-independent decision network (i.e., dorsolateral pFC, precuneus, and occipital areas) and intelligence. Furthermore, BOLD response in a value-dependent decision network (i.e., perigenual ACC, inferior frontal gyrus, ventromedial pFC, ventral striatum) was positively correlated with intelligence. The mediation analysis revealed that BOLD responses in the value-independent network mediated the association between intelligence and choice consistency, whereas BOLD responses in the value-dependent network mediated the association between intelligence and the discounting rate. In summary, our findings provide evidence for common neural correlates of intertemporal choice and intelligence, possibly linked by valuation as well as executive functions.

It has been suggested that adolescents process rewards differently from adults, both cognitively and affectively. In an fMRI study we recorded brain BOLD activity of adolescents (age range = 14–15 years) and adults (age range = 20–39 years) to investigate the developmental changes in reward processing and decision-making. In a probabilistic reversal learning task, adolescents and adults adapted to changes in reward contingencies. We used a reinforcement learning model with an adaptive learning rate for each trial to model the adolescents' and adults' behavior. Results showed that adolescents possessed a shallower slope in the sigmoid curve governing the relation between expected value (the value of the expected feedback, +1 and −1 representing rewarding and punishing feedback, respectively) and probability of stay (selecting the same option as in the previous trial). Trial-by-trial change in expected values after being correct or wrong was significantly different between adolescents and adults. These values were closer to certainty for adults. Additionally, absolute value of model-derived prediction error for adolescents was significantly higher after a correct response but a punishing feedback. At the neural level, BOLD correlates of learning rate, expected value, and prediction error did not significantly differ between adolescents and adults. Nor did we see group differences in the prediction error-related BOLD signal for different trial types. Our results indicate that adults seem to behaviorally integrate punishing feedback better than adolescents in their estimation of the current state of the contingencies. On the basis of these results, we argue that adolescents made decisions with less certainty when compared with adults and speculate that adolescents acquired a less accurate knowledge of their current state, that is, of being correct or wrong.