School of Psychology, UNSW Sydney, Australia.
Brain and Mind Centre and School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Australia.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022 Nov;142:104869. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104869. Epub 2022 Sep 13.
Habits are the subject of intense international research. Under the associative dual-process model the outcome devaluation paradigm has been used extensively to classify behaviours as being either goal-directed (sensitive to shifts in the value of associated outcomes) or habitual (triggered by stimuli without anticipation of consequences). This has proven to be a useful framework for studying the neurobiology of habit and relevance of habits in clinical psychopathology. However, in recent years issues have been raised about this rather narrow definition of habits in comparison to habitual behaviour experienced in the real world. Specifically, defining habits as the absence of goal-directed control, the very specific set-ups required to demonstrate habit experimentally and the lack of direct evidence for habits as stimulus-response behaviours are viewed as problematic. In this review paper we address key critiques that have been raised about habit research within the framework of the associative dual-process model. We then highlight novel research approaches studying different features of habits with methods that expand beyond traditional paradigms.
习惯是国际上研究的热点。在联想双重过程模型下，结果去评估范式被广泛用于将行为分类为目标导向的（对相关结果价值的变化敏感）或习惯的（由没有预期后果的刺激触发）。这已被证明是研究习惯的神经生物学和习惯在临床精神病理学中的相关性的有用框架。然而，近年来，与现实世界中经历的习惯行为相比，人们对这种相当狭隘的习惯定义提出了质疑。具体来说，将习惯定义为缺乏目标导向控制、在实验中证明习惯所需的非常具体的设置以及缺乏习惯作为刺激-反应行为的直接证据，都被认为是有问题的。在这篇综述文章中，我们将讨论在联想双重过程模型框架内对习惯研究提出的关键批评。然后，我们将重点介绍使用超越传统范式的方法研究习惯不同特征的新研究方法。
