Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Impaired Reinforcement Learning Underlying Explore-Exploit Decision Making in Theft Recidivists

Created on 17 Sep 2026

Authors

Goto, Y., Yoshino, S., Kita, C., Won, M., Lee, Y.-A.

Abstract

Larceny imposes profound societal and economic burdens; however, punitive judicial measures frequently fail to deter recidivism. The neurobehavioral mechanisms driving habitual offending, whether instrumental or kleptomanic, in theft recidivists remain poorly understood. In this study, we investigated explore-exploit decision-making and underlying reinforcement learning architectures in theft recidivists with a 4-arm bandit task while prefrontal cortex (PFC) hemodynamics were continuously monitored using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Model-free behavioral analyses revealed that non-kleptomanic (TR-K) but not kleptomanic (TR+K) theft recidivists accumulated significantly higher cumulative regret and made fewer optimal choices compared to control individuals without criminal records (CT). Model-based analyses through Variational Bayesian Analysis identified Q-learning with decay model as the optimal computational fit. Parameter extraction using the model demonstrated that the TR-K group exhibited a lower learning rate than CT and TR+K groups, indicating a learning deficit in updating action values following environmental feedback. fNIRS tracking of trial-by-trial latent reinforcement variables revealed that while PFC activity was modulated by these variables, group differences were characterized by static baseline hemodynamic shifts rather than rewirings of value-tracking neural circuits. These findings suggest that non-kleptomanic recurrent thefts may be associated with impaired reinforcement learning mechanisms, challenging current punitive deterrence models.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 17 Sep 2026.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 10
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement