PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 11, 2026Cell Reports0 citationsOpen Access

Full dopamine coding of basic economic subjective value: Utility and weighted probability

View Full Paper
SFSimone Ferrari-TonioloLSLeo Chi U SeakWSWolfram Schultz

Key Points

  • This research aims to understand how dopamine neurons encode subjective reward value from utility and weighted probability in monkeys.
  • Investigated reward signals in dopamine neurons of monkeys during uncertain reward choices.
  • Measured behaviors linked to subjective reward value.
  • Analyzed population-level dopamine signals in relation to subjective value components.
  • Dopamine signals consistently represent the integration of utility and weighted probability.
  • Subjectively weighted probability significantly influences the dopamine signal for subjective reward value.
  • Findings align with specific animal choice behaviors, validating the neuronal representation.

Abstract

Behavioral choices of uncertain rewards suggest that agents construct subjective reward value by combining the basic value components of utility and weighted probability. Despite the general acceptance of this evaluation mechanism for explaining economic choice, knowledge about its neuronal implementation is fractionated and remains essentially unknown. We investigate, in monkeys, whether reward signals in dopamine neurons represent subjective reward value based on these two fundamental value components. At the population level, the dopamine signal reliably represents the axiomatically defined integration of utility and weighted probability into subjective value in a way that closely matches animal-specific choice behavior. In particular, we find a crucial contribution of subjectively weighted probability to the dopamine signal of subjective reward value. These data demonstrate a neuronal implementation of subjective value constructed from the two most basic subjective reward components.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ferrari-Toniolo et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698c1bb8267fb587c655d900https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2026.116943
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk1979 · 47,949 citations
  2. 2Risky choice: Probability weighting explains independence axiom violations in monkeys2022 · 13 citations
  3. 3Sensory-specific and motivation-specific satiety for the sight and taste of food and water in man1983 · 249 citations
  4. 4Le Comportement de l'Homme Rationnel devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de l'Ecole Americaine1953 · 4,108 citations
  5. 5Nonhuman Primates Satisfy Utility Maximization in Compliance with the Continuity Axiom of Expected Utility Theory2021 · 23 citations