Overview
- University of Bologna researchers used a three-phase Pavlovian–Instrumental Transfer task with eye-tracking, pupillometry, and computational modeling.
- Participants labeled as sign-trackers showed larger pupil dilation to reward cues than to neutral cues, signaling heightened cue sensitivity.
- Computational analyses indicated lower performance in sign-trackers was driven by slower updating of Pavlovian cue values rather than overweighting cue values over action values.
- Goal-trackers updated values quickly when cue–outcome relationships changed, whereas sign-trackers persisted in disadvantageous choices.
- The authors highlight relevance to addiction and compulsive disorders and urge clinical studies and intervention tests to modulate learning rates.