Adolescents flexibly adapt action selection based on controllability inferences.

From early in life, we encounter both controllable environments, in which our actions can causally influence the reward outcomes we experience, and uncontrollable environments, in which they cannot. Environmental controllability is theoretically proposed to organize our behavior. In controllable contexts, we can learn to proactively select instrumental actions that bring about desired outcomes. In uncontrollable environments, Pavlovian learning enables hard-wired, reflexive reactions to anticipated, motivationally salient events, providing "default" behavioral responses. Previous studies characterizing the balance between Pavlovian and instrumental learning systems across development have yielded divergent findings, with some studies observing heightened expression of Pavlovian learning during adolescence and others observing a reduced influence of Pavlovian learning during this developmental stage. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether a theoretical model of controllability-dependent arbitration between learning systems might explain these seemingly divergent findings in the developmental literature, with the specific hypothesis that adolescents' action selection might be particularly sensitive to environmental controllability. To test this hypothesis, 90 participants, aged 8-27, performed a probabilistic-learning task that enables estimation of Pavlovian influence on instrumental learning, across both controllable and uncontrollable conditions. We fit participants' data with a reinforcement-learning model in which controllability inferences adaptively modulate the dominance of Pavlovian versus instrumental control. Relative to children and adults, adolescents exhibited greater flexibility in calibrating the expression of Pavlovian bias to the degree of environmental controllability. These findings suggest that sensitivity to environmental reward statistics that organize motivated behavior may be heightened during adolescence.

Developmental shifts in computations used to detect environmental controllability.

Accurate assessment of environmental controllability enables individuals to adaptively adjust their behavior-exploiting rewards when desirable outcomes are contingent upon their actions and minimizing costly deliberation when their actions are inconsequential. However, it remains unclear how estimation of environmental controllability changes from childhood to adulthood. Ninety participants (ages 8-25) completed a task that covertly alternated between controllable and uncontrollable conditions, requiring them to explore different actions to discover the current degree of environmental controllability. We found that while children were able to distinguish controllable and uncontrollable conditions, accuracy of controllability assessments improved with age. Computational modeling revealed that whereas younger participants' controllability assessments relied on evidence gleaned through random exploration, older participants more effectively recruited their task structure knowledge to make highly informative interventions. Age-related improvements in working memory mediated this qualitative shift toward increased use of an inferential strategy. Collectively, these findings reveal an age-related shift in the cognitive processes engaged to assess environmental controllability. Improved detection of environmental controllability may foster increasingly adaptive behavior over development by revealing when actions can be leveraged for one's benefit.

Adolescents exhibit reduced Pavlovian biases on instrumental learning.

Multiple learning systems allow individuals to flexibly respond to opportunities and challenges present in the environment. An evolutionarily conserved "Pavlovian" learning mechanism couples valence and action, promoting a tendency to approach cues associated with reward and to inhibit action in the face of anticipated punishment. Although this default response system may be adaptive, these hard-wired reactions can hinder the ability to learn flexible "instrumental" actions in pursuit of a goal. Such constraints on behavioral flexibility have been studied extensively in adults. However, the extent to which these valence-specific response tendencies bias instrumental learning across development remains poorly characterized. Here, we show that while Pavlovian response biases constrain flexible action learning in children and adults, these biases are attenuated in adolescents. This adolescent-specific reduction in Pavlovian bias may promote unbiased exploration of approach and avoidance responses, facilitating the discovery of rewarding behavior in the many novel contexts that adolescents encounter.

Frontopolar activity and connectivity support dynamic conscious augmentation of creative state.

No ability is more valued in the modern innovation-fueled economy than thinking creatively on demand, and the "thinking cap" capacity to augment state creativity (i.e., to try and succeed at thinking more creatively) is of broad importance for education and a rich mental life. Although brain-based creativity research has focused on static individual differences in trait creativity, less is known about changes in creative state within an individual. How does the brain augment state creativity when creative thinking is required? Can augmented creative state be consciously engaged and disengaged dynamically across time? Using a novel "thin slice" creativity paradigm in 55 fMRI participants performing verb-generation, we successfully cued large, conscious, short-duration increases in state creativity, indexed quantitatively by a measure of semantic distance derived via latent semantic analysis. A region of left frontopolar cortex, previously associated with creative integration of semantic information, exhibited increased activity and functional connectivity to anterior cingulate gyrus and right frontopolar cortex during cued augmentation of state creativity. Individual differences in the extent of increased activity in this region predicted individual differences in the extent to which participants were able to successfully augment state creative performance after accounting for trait creativity and intelligence.