Evidence against perfect integration of sensory information during perceptual decision making

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 115, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 915-930

  Carland, Matthew A ^a   Marcos, Encarni ^b,c   Thura, David ^a   Cisek, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA   (Spain)

^c SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Decision making; Drift diffusion model; Urgency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FILTER; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTEGRATION; MALE; MOTIVATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PULSE RATE; REACTION TIME; SENSORY SYSTEM; TASK PERFORMANCE; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SENSORIMOTOR CORTEX;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOVEMENT; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SENSORIMOTOR CORTEX;

EID: 84958576292     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: 15221598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00264.2015     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Bogacz R, Brown E, Moehlis J, Holmes P, Cohen JD. The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. Psychol Rev 113: 700–765, 2006.
2. Britten KH, Shadlen MN, Newsome WT, Movshon JA. The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of neuronal and psychophysical performance. J Neurosci 12: 4745–4765, 1992.
3. Brunton BW, Botvinick MM, Brody CD. Rats and humans can optimally accumulate evidence for decision-making. Science 340: 95–98, 2013.
4. Busemeyer JR, Townsend JT. Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychol Rev 100: 432–459, 1993.
5. Carland M, Marcos E, Thura D, Verschure P, Cisek P. Decision-making is influenced by a context-dependent urgency signal (Abstract). Neuroscience Meeting Planner 2013: Program No. 286.11.2013, 2013.
6. Carland MA, Thura D, Cisek P. The urgency-gating model can explain the effects of early evidence. Psychon Bull Rev 22: 1830–1838, 2015.
7. Chittka L, Skorupski P, Raine NE. Speed-accuracy tradeoffs in animal decision making. Trends Ecol Evol 24: 400–407, 2009.
8. Churchland AK, Kiani R, Chaudhuri R, Wang XJ, Pouget A, Shadlen MN. Variance as a signature of neural computations during decision making. Neuron 69: 818–831, 2011.
9. Churchland AK, Kiani R, Shadlen MN. Decision-making with multiple alternatives. Nat Neurosci 11: 693–702, 2008.
10. Cisek P, Puskas GA, El-Murr S. Decisions in changing conditions: the urgency-gating model. J Neurosci 29: 11560–11571, 2009.
11. Coallier E, Kalaska JF. Reach target selection in humans using ambiguous decision cues containing variable amounts of conflicting sensory evidence supporting each target choice. J Neurophysiol 112: 2916–2938, 2014.
12. Cook EP, Maunsell JH. Dynamics of neuronal responses in macaque MT and VIP during motion detection. Nat Neurosci 5: 985–994, 2002.
13. Ditterich J. Evidence for time-variant decision making. Eur J Neurosci 24: 3628–3641, 2006.
14. Drugowitsch J, Moreno-Bote R, Churchland AK, Shadlen MN, Pouget A. The cost of accumulating evidence in perceptual decision making. J Neurosci 32: 3612–3628, 2012.
15. Gluth S, Reiskamp J, Büchel C. Deciding when to decide: time-variant sequential sampling models explain the emergence of value-based decisions in the human brain. J Neurosci 32: 10686–10698, 2012.
16. Gold JI, Shadlen MN. Representation of a perceptual decision in developing oculomotor commands. Nature 404: 390–394, 2000.
17. Gold JI, Shadlen MN. The influence of behavioral context on the representation of a perceptual decision in developing oculomotor commands. J Neurosci 23: 632–651, 2003.
18. Gold JI, Shadlen MN. The neural basis of decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci 30: 535–574, 2007.
19. Hanks T, Kiani R, Shadlen MN. A neural mechanism of speed-accuracy tradeoff in macaque area LIP. Elife 3: e02260, 2014.
20. Hanks TD, Kopec CD, Brunton BW, Duan CA, Erlich JC, Brody CD. Distinct relationships of parietal and prefrontal cortices to evidence accumulation. Nature 520: 220–223, 2015.
21. Hawkins GE, Forstmann BU, Wagenmakers EJ, Ratcliff R, Brown SD. Revisiting the evidence for collapsing boundaries and urgency signals in perceptual decision-making. J Neurosci 35: 2476–2484, 2015a.
22. Hawkins GE, Wagenmakers EJ, Ratcliff R, Brown SD. Discriminating evidence accumulation from urgency signals in speeded decision making. J Neurophysiol 114: 40–47, 2015b.
23. Huang Y, Rao RP. Reward optimization in the primate brain: a probabilistic model of decision making under uncertainty. PloS One 8: e53344, 2013.
24. Huk AC, Shadlen MN. Neural activity in macaque parietal cortex reflects temporal integration of visual motion signals during perceptual decision making. J Neurosci 25: 10420–10436, 2005.
25. Kiani R, Hanks TD, Shadlen MN. Bounded integration in parietal cortex underlies decisions even when viewing duration is dictated by the environment. J Neurosci 28: 3017–3029, 2008.
26. Kim JN, Shadlen MN. Neural correlates of a decision in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the macaque. Nat Neurosci 2: 176–185, 1999.
27. Kira S, Yang T, Shadlen MN. A neural implementation of Wald’s sequential probability ratio test. Neuron 85: 861–873, 2015.
28. Laming DR. Information Theory of Choice-Reaction Times. New York: Wiley, 1968.
29. Luna R, Hernandez A, Brody CD, Romo R. Neural codes for perceptual discrimination in primary somatosensory cortex. Nat Neurosci 8: 1210–1219, 2005.
30. Marcos E, Carland M, Thura D, Cisek P, Verschure PF. Decision-making depends on an urgency signal modulated by context (Abstract). Neuroscience Meeting Planner 2012: Program No. 494.11.2012, 2012.
31. Newsome WT, Britten KH, Movshon JA. Neuronal correlates of a perceptual decision. Nature 341: 52–54, 1989.
32. Ossmy O, Moran R, Pfeffer T, Tsetsos K, Usher M, Donner TH. The timescale of perceptual evidence integration can be adapted to the environment. Curr Biol 23: 981–986, 2013.
33. Palmer J, Huk AC, Shadlen MN. The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. J Vis 5: 376–404, 2005.
34. Ratcliff R. A theory of memory retrieval. Psychol Rev 83: 59–108, 1978.
35. Ratcliff R. A diffusion model account of response time and accuracy in a brightness discrimination task: fitting real data and failing to fit fake but plausible data. Psychon Bull Rev 9: 278–291, 2002.
36. Ratcliff R, Cherian A, Segraves M. A comparison of macaque behavior and superior colliculus neuronal activity to predictions from models of twochoice decisions. J Neurophysiol 90: 1392–1407, 2003.
37. Ratcliff R, Hasegawa YT, Hasegawa YP, Smith PL, Segraves MA. Dual diffusion model for single-cell recording data from the superior colliculus in a brightness-discrimination task. J Neurophysiol 97: 1756–1774, 2007.
38. Ratcliff R, McKoon G. The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Comput 20: 873–922, 2008.
39. Ratcliff R, Rouder JN. Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychol Sci 9: 347–356, 1998.
40. Ratcliff R, Rouder JN. A diffusion model account of masking in two-choice letter identification. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26: 127–140, 2000.
41. Ratcliff R, Smith PL. A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychol Rev 111: 333–367, 2004.
42. Reddi BA, Carpenter RH. The influence of urgency on decision time. Nat Neurosci 3: 827–830, 2000.
43. Roe RM, Busemeyer JR, Townsend JT. Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. Psychol Rev 108: 370–392, 2001.
44. Roitman JD, Shadlen MN. Response of neurons in the lateral intraparietal area during a combined visual discrimination reaction time task. J Neurosci 22: 9475–9489, 2002.
45. Standage D, You H, Wang DH, Dorris MC. Gain modulation by an urgency signal controls the speed-accuracy trade-off in a network model of a cortical decision circuit. Front Comput Neurosci 5: 7, 2011.
46. Thura D, Beauregard-Racine J, Fradet CW, Cisek P. Decision making by urgency gating: theory and experimental support. J Neurophysiol 108: 2912–2930, 2012.
47. Thura D, Cisek P. Deliberation and commitment in the premotor and primary motor cortex during dynamic decision making. Neuron 81: 1401–1416, 2014.
48. Thura D, Cos I, Trung J, Cisek P. Context-dependent urgency influences speed-accuracy trade-offs in decision-making and movement execution. J Neurosci 34: 16442–16454, 2014.
49. Tremel JJ, Wheeler ME. Content-specific evidence accumulation in inferior temporal cortex during perceptual decision-making. Neuroimage 109: 35– 49, 2015.
50. Tsetsos K, Gao J, McClelland JL, Usher M. Using time-varying evidence to test models of decision dynamics: bounded diffusion vs. the leaky competing accumulator model. Front Neurosci 6: 79, 2012.
51. Uchida N, Kepecs A, Mainen ZF. Seeing at a glance, smelling in a whiff: rapid forms of perceptual decision making. Nat Rev Neurosci 7: 485–491, 2006.
52. Usher M, McClelland JL. The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychol Rev 108: 550–592, 2001.
53. Wald A. Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Ann Math Stat 16: 117–186, 1945.
54. Wang XJ. Probabilistic decision making by slow reverberation in cortical circuits. Neuron 36: 955–968, 2002.
55. Winkel J, Keuken MC, van Maanen L, Wagenmakers EJ, Forstmann BU. Early evidence affects later decisions: why evidence accumulation is required to explain response time data. Psychon Bull Rev 21: 777–784, 2014.
56. Wong KF, Huk AC, Shadlen MN, Wang XJ. Neural circuit dynamics underlying accumulation of time-varying evidence during perceptual decision making. Front Comput Neurosci 1: 6, 2007.
57. Yang T, Shadlen MN. Probabilistic reasoning by neurons. Nature 447: 1075–1080, 2007.
58. Yang Y, DeWeese MR, Otazu GH, Zador AM. Millisecond-scale differences in neural activity in auditory cortex can drive decisions. Nat Neurosci 11: 1262–1263, 2008.