Optimal sampling and signal detection: Unifying models of attention and speed-accuracy trade-offs

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 605-616

  Abbott, Kevin R ^a   Sherratt, Thomas N ^a  

^a CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

attentional allocation; mimicry; sampling; signal detection theory; speed accuracy trade offs

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DETECTION METHOD; ERROR ANALYSIS; MIMICRY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PERCEPTION; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SAMPLING; SIGNAL; TRADE-OFF;

EID: 84875983259     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/art001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Averbeck BB, Latham PE, Pouget A. 2006. Neural correlations, population coding and computation. Nat Rev Neurosci. 7: 358-366.
2. Bates H. 1862. Contribution to an insect fauna of the Amazon Valley, Lepidoptera: Heliconidae. Trans Linn Soc Lond. 23: 495-566.
3. Charnov EL. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol. 9: 129-136.
4. Chittka L, Osorio D. 2007. Cognitive dimensions of predator responses to imperfect mimicry. PLoS Biol. 5: e339.
5. Chittka L, Skorupski P, Raine NE. 2009. Speed-accuracy tradeoffs in animal decision making. Trends Ecol Evol. 24: 400-407.
6. Clark CW, Dukas R. 2003. The behavioral ecology of a cognitive constraint: limited attention. Behav Ecol. 14: 151-156. (Pubitemid 36386331)
7. Clark CW, Mangel M. 2000. Dynamic state variable models in ecology: methods and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Cohen JD, McClure SM, Yu AJ. 2007. Should I stay or should I go How the human brain manages the trade-off between exploitation and exploration. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. 362: 933-942. (Pubitemid 47056820)
9. Cook R, Cockrell B. 1978. Predator ingestion rate and its bearing on feeding time and the theory of optimal diets. J Anim Ecol. 47: 529-547.
10. Dukas R. 2002. Behavioural and ecological consequences of limited attention. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. 357: 1539-1547. (Pubitemid 35442098)
11. Dukas R. 2004. Causes and consequences of limited attention. Brain Behav Evol. 63: 197-210. (Pubitemid 38490187)
12. Dukas R, Clark CW. 1995. Searching for cryptic prey: a dynamic model. Ecology. 76: 1320-1326.
13. Dukas R, Ellner S. 1993. Information processing and prey detection. Ecology. 74: 1337-1346.
14. Dukas R, Kamil AC. 2001. Limited attention: the constraint underlying search image. Behav Ecol. 12: 192-199. (Pubitemid 32228459)
15. Edwards W. 1965. Optimal strategies for seeking information: models for statistics, choice reaction times, and human information processing. J Math Psychol. 329: 312-329.
16. Gendron RP, Staddon JER. 1983. Searching for cryptic prey: the effect of search rate. Am Nat. 121: 172-186. (Pubitemid 14271629)
17. Getty T. 1985. Discriminability and the sigmoid functional response: how optimal foragers could stabilize model-mimic complexes. Am Nat. 125: 239-256. (Pubitemid 16276195)
18. Getty T. 1996. Mate selection by repeated inspection: more on pied flycatchers. Anim Behav. 51: 739-745.
19. Gilbert FS. 2005. The evolution of imperfect mimicry. In: Fellowes MDE, Holloway GJ, Rolff J, editors. Insect evolutionary ecology. Vol. 13. Wallingford (UK): CABI Publishing. p. 231-288.
20. Green DM, Swets JA. 1966. Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
21. Guilford T. 1994. "Go-slow" signalling and the problem of automimicry. J Theor Biol. 170: 311-316.
22. Holen H, Johnstone RA. 2004. The evolution of mimicry under constraints. Am Nat. 164: 598-613. (Pubitemid 39520702)
23. Ings TC, Chittka L. 2008. Speed-accuracy tradeoffs and false alarms in bee responses to cryptic predators. Curr Biol. 18: 1520-1524.
24. Jazayeri M, Movshon JA. 2006. Optimal representation of sensory information by neural populations. Nat Neurosci. 9: 690-696. (Pubitemid 44012268)
25. Johnstone RA. 2002. The evolution of inaccurate mimics. Nature. 418: 524-526. (Pubitemid 34851396)
26. Logan GD. 2004. Cumulative progress in formal theories of attention. Annu Rev Psychol. 55: 207-234.
27. Lu ZL, Dosher BA. 1998. External noise distinguishes attention mechanisms. Vis Res. 38: 1183-1198. (Pubitemid 28204060)
28. Ma WJ, Beck JM, Latham PE, Pouget A. 2006. Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes. Nat Neurosci. 9: 1432-1438. (Pubitemid 44646216)
29. Mangel M, Clark CW. 1988. Dynamic modeling in behavioral ecology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
30. Metcalfe NB, Huntingford FA, Thorpe JE. 1987. Predation risk impairs diet selection in juvenile salmon. Anim Behav. 35: 931-933.
31. Oaten A, Pearce C, Smyth M. 1975. Batesian mimicry and signal detection theory. Bull Math Biol. 37: 367-387.
32. Palmer J, Huk A, Shadlen MN. 2005. The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. J Vis. 5: 376-404. (Pubitemid 41519235)
33. Penney HD, Hassall C, Skevington JH, Abbott KR, Sherratt TN. 2012. A comparative analysis of the evolution of imperfect mimicry. Nature. 483: 461-464.
34. Piccolo J, Hughes N, Bryant M. 2008. Water velocity influences prey detection and capture by drift-feeding juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 65: 266-275. (Pubitemid 351302512)
35. Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP. 2004. Avoiding attack: the evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Sherratt TN. 2001. The evolution of female-limited polymorphisms in damselflies: a signal detection model. Ecol Lett. 4: 22-29. (Pubitemid 32145265)
37. Sherratt TN. 2002. The evolution of imperfect mimicry. Behav Ecol. 13: 821-826. (Pubitemid 35464871)
38. Simen P, Contreras D, Buck C, Hu P, Holmes P, Cohen J. 2009. Reward rate optimization in two-alternative decision making: empirical tests of theoretical predictions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 35: 1865-1897.
39. Smith P. 2000. Stochastic dynamic models of response time and accuracy: a foundational primer. J Math Psychol. 44: 408-463.
40. Smith PL, Ratcliff R. 2009. An integrated theory of attention and decision making in visual signal detection. Psychol Rev. 116: 283-317.
41. Staddon J, Gendron R. 1983. Optimal detection of cryptic prey may lead to predator switching. Am Nat. 122: 843-848.
42. Stephens DW. 1987. On economically tracking a variable environment. Theor Popul Biol. 32: 15-25.
43. Stephens DW. 2007. Models of information use. In: Stephens DW, Brown JS, Ydenberg RC, editors. Foraging: behavior and ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 31-58.
44. Ting JJ, Bots J, Jvostov FP, Gossum H, Sherratt TN. 2009. Effects of extreme variation in female morph frequencies on the mating behaviour of male damselflies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 64: 225-236.
45. Trimmer PC, Houston AI, Marshall JAR, Bogacz R, Paul ES, Mendl MT, McNamara JM. 2008. Mammalian choices: combining fast-butinaccurate and slow-but-accurate decision-making systems. Proc R Soc B. 275: 2353-2361.
46. Wickens T. 2002. Elementary signal detection theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.