Executive Function
Pavlovian-Instrumental Transfer Task
Also called: PIT task, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer task, outcome-specific transfer task
Measure how reward cues steer effort: participants press two keys for fruit, learn which pictures signal which fruit, then press while the pictures appear.
8-10 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 70
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 3
What it measures
Measures how a picture that signals a reward steers effort toward that reward. Participants press two keys to win two kinds of fruit, learn which pictures come before which fruit, then press while the pictures appear and the prizes are hidden. The main score is the shift toward the key that wins the fruit a picture signals.
Constructs
- Pavlovian-instrumental transfer
- Cue-driven reward seeking
- Instrumental learning
- Pavlovian learning
Research uses
- Reward and motivation research at the group level
- Eating and addiction research on how cues steer reward seeking
- Within-study comparison of outcome-specific and general transfer
How the paradigm works
Pavlovian-instrumental transfer is the pull that a cue for a reward has on effort to get rewards, although the cue never depended on what the person did (Estes, 1948; Rescorla and Solomon, 1967). In its outcome-specific form, a cue for one reward raises the action that earns that same reward more than an action that earns another (Kruse and colleagues, 1983; Corbit and Balleine, 2005). Human studies use it to ask how cues steer reward seeking, for example in eating and addiction research (Holmes, Marchand and Coutureau, 2010; Cartoni, Balleine and Baldassarre, 2016).
More about the paradigm
This version follows the full transfer design of Corbit and Balleine (2005) in the human form of Cartoni and colleagues (2015), with free pressing in turns of 6 seconds. First, in 12 turns, participants press the F and J keys as often as they like. Each key wins its own fruit (pictures of an apple, a kiwi or blueberries) on a random-interval schedule, so pressing both keys wins the most. Next, four abstract pictures appear 6 times each: two come before the fruit the keys win, one before a third fruit that no key wins and one before nothing, and participants guess what comes next before they see it. In the transfer test, each picture appears in 6 turns (4 to 10 in the settings) while participants press as before. Presses still win, but the prize box is covered and the total is shown at the end. Last, participants say what came after each picture and what each key won. Which fruit and picture go with which key and role is drawn for each session, and two practice turns come first. Points per fruit are a setting (1 as standard; 0 runs the task without points), and the instructions mention money only if the study turns on the payment line.
The main score, specific transfer, is the share of presses on the key that wins the fruit a picture signals, averaged over the two such pictures, minus 50%, in percentage points. Positive values mean the pictures pushed pressing toward the key for their own fruit. General transfer is presses per turn under the picture for the third fruit minus presses under the picture for nothing. The task also reports presses on the same and the other key, presses per learning turn, how evenly the keys were used while learning, correct guesses, the pairings recalled at the end, fruit and points won, turns without a press and anticipations. Presses in the first 100 ms of a turn are anticipations and are left out. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Specific Transfer%
- Under the two pictures that signal a fruit a key wins, the share of presses on that key, averaged over the two pictures, minus 50%.
- Positive values mean pictures pushed pressing toward the key for their own fruit; not better or worse
- Presses on the Signaled Keycount
- Mean presses per test turn on the key that wins the fruit the picture signals, under the two such pictures.
- Informational
- Presses on the Other Keycount
- Mean presses per test turn on the other key, under the same two pictures.
- Informational
- General Transfercount
- Mean presses per test turn under the picture for the fruit no key wins, minus under the picture that signals nothing.
- Positive values mean a reward picture raised pressing in general; not better or worse
- Presses, Third-Fruit Picturecount
- Mean presses per test turn, both keys, under the picture for the fruit no key wins.
- Informational
- Presses, No-Fruit Picturecount
- Mean presses per test turn, both keys, under the picture that signals nothing.
- Informational
- Presses per Learning Turncount
- Mean presses per 6 second turn while the fruit could be seen.
- Informational
- Less-Used Key While Learning%
- Share of the learning presses on the less-pressed key; 0.5 means both keys were pressed equally.
- Quality check
- Less-Used Key in the Test%
- Share of the test presses on the less-pressed key; 0.5 means both keys were pressed equally.
- Quality check
- Correct Guesses%
- Share of correct guesses of what comes after a picture, in the second half of the picture trials.
- Higher means the picture pairings were learned
- Picture Pairings Recalled%
- Share of the four pictures for which the participant recalled at the end what came after it.
- Quality check
- Key Pairings Recalled%
- Share of the two keys for which the participant recalled at the end what it won.
- Quality check
- Fruit Woncount
- Fruit won in the learning turns and, out of sight, in the test turns.
- Informational
- Total Pointspoints
- Fruit won times the points per fruit.
- Informational
- Test Turns Without a Presscount
- Test turns with no press after the first 100 ms.
- Quality check
- Anticipationscount
- Presses in the first 100 ms of a learning or test turn, left out of every score.
- Quality check
Use and evidence
70 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 30% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 224 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 35 |
| 2024 | 9 |
| 2023 | 9 |
| 2022 | 9 |
| 2021 | 8 |
| 2020 | 6 |
| 2019 | 8 |
| 2018 | 10 |
| 2017 | 14 |
| 2016 | 16 |
| 2015 | 9 |
| 2014 | 9 |
| 2013 | 13 |
| 2012 | 12 |
| 2011 | 8 |
| 2010 | 4 |
| 2009 | 1 |
| 2008 | 6 |
| 2007 | 10 |
| 2006 | 3 |
| 2005 | 4 |
| 2004 | 3 |
| 2003 | 4 |
| 2002 | 3 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2000 | 2 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 1
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 6
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 3
Note on the counts: includes animal studies.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Prizes
- 3 fruit pictures from Noto Emoji, a freely licensed set: an apple, a kiwi and blueberries, each worth the same points. Practice uses a star.
- Keys
- F and J. Each key wins its own fruit, drawn for each session, and no key wins the third fruit. A prize is ready on a key 1,000 to 3,000 ms after the last one, in steps of 100 ms, and goes to the next press on that key, so pressing both keys wins the most.
- Turns
- 6 seconds of free pressing after a blank of 1,000 to 2,000 ms. Holding a key down counts once, and a press in the first 100 ms is an anticipation and is left out.
- Learning
- 12 turns. Each fruit shows in the prize box for 600 ms when it is won, with a counter of points.
- Pictures
- 4 abstract pictures drawn by code in one color, each with its own outline and pattern. 2 signal the fruit the keys win, 1 the third fruit and 1 nothing; which picture has which role is drawn for each session.
- Picture trials
- 6 per picture, 24 in all, in blocks of 4: the picture alone for 1,000 ms, then a guess of what comes next (one of the 3 fruit or nothing), then what comes for 1,000 ms.
- Transfer test
- 6 turns per picture (standard; 4 to 10), 24 in all, in blocks of 4 in a seeded order, with the prize box covered. Presses still win out of sight, and the total is shown at the end.
- Questions
- At the end, with no feedback: what came after each picture, and what each key won.
- Points
- 1 per fruit (standard, 0 to 10). At 0 the task runs without points. Money is mentioned only if the study turns on the payment line.
- Practice
- 2 turns in which any press may win a star, each followed by the number of presses and stars.
The design is the full transfer design of Corbit and Balleine (2005) in the human form of Cartoni and colleagues (2015), with keys in place of buttons and fruit pictures in place of real food. Human studies often leave out participants who answer the pairing questions wrongly; this test flags them for review. In another transfer task, scores were reliable within a session but only moderately stable over three weeks (Belanger and colleagues, 2025), so compare groups rather than individuals. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: pavlovian_transfer_test from the scored run, one turn of free pressing per row, with no correct answer. More than max(3, 25%) turns without a press invalidate; any is flagged. More than max(2, 20%) turns whose first press came under 100 ms after the start invalidate; any is flagged. One key under 5% of the test presses or under 10% of the learning presses, or a wrong answer at the end about the pictures or keys, is flagged and withholds the percentile. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. Each turn asks for pressing, so a turn with no press is a missed response. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms keep the platform's timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed responses or more than max(2, 20%) responses under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. A response under 100 ms cannot be a reaction to the stimulus. Outcome-specific transfer is a shift between the two keys, so it needs both keys in use and both pairings known; human studies leave out participants who answer the pairing questions wrongly (Cartoni and colleagues, 2015). A hidden tab stops the pressing while the turn runs on, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Test turns per picture | 6 | 4 to 10 |
| Points per fruit | 1 | 0 to 10 |
| Payment line | No mention of money (standard) | No mention of money (standard), The study pays for points |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Pavlovian-Instrumental Transfer Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Estes, 1948; Corbit & Balleine, 2005; Cartoni et al., 2015), with the standard settings (test turns per picture: 6; points per fruit: 1; payment line: No mention of money). The main score was specific transfer (under the two pictures that signal a fruit a key wins, the share of presses on that key, averaged over the two pictures, minus 50%).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Estes, W. K. (1948). Discriminative conditioning. II. Effects of a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus upon a subsequently established operant response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38(2), 173-177. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057525
- Corbit, L. H., & Balleine, B. W. (2005). Double dissociation of basolateral and central amygdala lesions on the general and outcome-specific forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. Journal of Neuroscience, 25(4), 962-970. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4507-04.2005The full transfer design: cues for the outcomes of two actions and a cue for an outcome no action earns.
- Cartoni, E., Moretta, T., Puglisi-Allegra, S., Cabib, S., & Baldassarre, G. (2015). The relationship between specific Pavlovian instrumental transfer and instrumental reward probability. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1697. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01697Free pressing on two keys in 6 second turns, pictures as cues, the covered test and the shift score.
- Talmi, D., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2008). Human Pavlovian-instrumental transfer. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(2), 360-368. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4028-07.2008General transfer in people.
- Watson, P., Wiers, R. W., Hommel, B., & de Wit, S. (2014). Working for food you don't desire. Cues interfere with goal-directed food-seeking. Appetite, 79, 139-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.04.005Outcome-specific transfer in people with food outcomes.
- Holmes, N. M., Marchand, A. R., & Coutureau, E. (2010). Pavlovian to instrumental transfer: A neurobehavioural perspective. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34(8), 1277-1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.03.007Review.
- Cartoni, E., Balleine, B., & Baldassarre, G. (2016). Appetitive Pavlovian-instrumental transfer: A review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 71, 829-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.020Review of the human and animal designs.
- Belanger, M. J., Chen, H., Fröhner, J. H., Garbusow, M., Heinz, A., & Smolka, M. N. (2025). Behavioural and neural reliability of a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer task. Addiction Biology, 30(12), e70112. https://doi.org/10.1111/adb.70112How stable transfer scores are.
Source papers
- Cartoni E, Moretta T, Puglisi-Allegra S, Cabib S, Baldassarre G (2015). The relationship between specific Pavlovian instrumental transfer and instrumental reward probability. Frontiers in Psychology, 6:1697.Paradigm source, Adults
- Belanger MJ, Chen H, Fröhner JH, Garbusow M, Heinz A, Smolka MN (2025). Behavioural and neural reliability of a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer task. Addiction Biology, 30(12):e70112.Paradigm source, Adults
- No normative data for this task.Paradigm source, N/A
Questions
How long does the Pavlovian-Instrumental Transfer Task take?
About 8 to 10 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Specific Transfer, Presses on the Signaled Key, Presses on the Other Key, General Transfer, Presses, Third-Fruit Picture, Presses, No-Fruit Picture, Presses per Learning Turn, Less-Used Key While Learning, Less-Used Key in the Test, Correct Guesses, Picture Pairings Recalled, Key Pairings Recalled, Fruit Won, Total Points, Test Turns Without a Press and Anticipations. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Pavlovian-Instrumental Transfer Task used in research?
70 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 30% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 224 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Pavlovian-Instrumental Transfer Task have?
In the published research, 1 paper reports its test-retest reliability and 3 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Test turns per picture (4 to 10), points per fruit (0 to 10) and payment line (No mention of money (standard), The study pays for points). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.