Back

Novel devaluation methods to explore habits in humans

Michiels, M.

2026-01-27 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.01.25.701564 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Habits in humans are commonly studied through outcome devaluation paradigms, but most existing tasks fail to capture the robustness of habitual behavior seen in animal models. I introduce two novel behavioral tasks designed to overcome these limitations. In the first task, ("shooting aliens task", n = 45), I simplified an existing instrumental learning task and implemented a novel intra-block reversal method in which stimulus positions changed unexpectedly within blocks while maintaining the same stimulus-action mappings. Participants also completed a classical devaluation phase with explicit reward changes. In the second task ("hands-attack task", n = 44), which relied on real-life avoidance behavior, devaluation was achieved by reversing reward contingencies and allowing participants to inhibit the dominant avoidance response in favor of a more effortful counterattack. Across both tasks, overtrained conditions led to more errors and longer response times after devaluation, confirming increased insensitivity to outcome change. Intra-block reversals in the shooting aliens task produced stronger habitual signatures than standard whole-block devaluation, revealing a greater cost of overriding automatic responses. In the hands-attack task, even without prior training, participants showed clear markers of habitual behavior, suggesting that real-world action patterns can replicate key features of laboratory habits. Interestingly, participants were more accurate in overriding overtrained responses when attacks were highly familiar, possibly due to enhanced perceptual processing, although this came at the cost of longer response times. These findings introduce two complementary tools that address key limitations in current paradigms: the intra-block reversal increases habit sensitivity without inflating working memory demands, while the hands-attack task captures naturalistic habit expression without artificial training, using a single, ecologically valid session. Both are suited for clinical applications, particularly where time constraints or cognitive load limit the feasibility of traditional approaches.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Science of Learning
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
2
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
10.0%
3
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.0%
4
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.3%
5
Communications Psychology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
Cognition
44 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.3%
9
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 17%
4.1%
10
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.9%
11
Psychological Science
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
12
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
46 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.6%
13
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.9%
14
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
15
Learning & Memory
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
16
Journal of Neurophysiology
263 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
17
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
18
Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
19
Psychological Review
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
20
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
21
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.9%
22
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
23
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
24
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.7%
25
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%