Despite widespread interest in neural mechanisms of decision-making, most investigations focus on decisions between just two options. Here we adapt a biophysically plausible model of decision-making to predict how a key decision variable, the value difference signal-encoding how much better one choice is than another-changes with the value of a third, but unavailable, alternative. The model predicts a surprising failure of optimal decision-making: greater difficulty choosing between two options in the presence of a third very poor, as opposed to very good, alternative. Both investigation of human decision-making and functional magnetic resonance imaging-based measurements of value difference signals in ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) bore out this prediction. The vmPFC signal decreased in the presence of low-value third alternatives, and vmPFC effect sizes predicted individual variation in suboptimal decision-making in the presence of multiple alternatives. The effect contrasts with that of divisive normalization in parietal cortex.

very day, chacma baboons, an old world primate, navigate to and from the safety of their sleeping post and distant foraging or watering sites 1. The decision to move to alternative locations is not simply guided by accumulation of sensory evidence for that choice but by internal representation or memory of the alternative choice's value. The same is true when they move back toward the sleeping post in the evening. While sensory and associative decision-making have been well-studied 2 , less is known about how representations of counterfactual choices-choices not currently taken but which may be taken in the

SummaryRecent studies have challenged the view that orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and amygdala mediate flexible reward-guided behavior. We trained macaques to perform an object discrimination reversal task during fMRI sessions and identified a lateral OFC (lOFC) region in which activity predicted adaptive win-stay/lose-shift behavior. Amygdala and lOFC activity was more strongly coupled on lose-shift trials. However, lOFC-amygdala coupling was also modulated by the relevance of reward information in a manner consistent with a role in establishing how credit for reward should be assigned. Day-to-day fluctuations in signals and signal coupling were correlated with day-to-day fluctuation in performance. A second experiment confirmed the existence of signals for adaptive stay/shift behavior in lOFC and reflecting irrelevant reward in the amygdala in a probabilistic learning task. Our data demonstrate that OFC and amygdala each make unique contributions to flexible behavior and credit assignment.