When faced with multiple potential movement options, individuals either reach directly to one of the options, or initiate a reach intermediate between the options. It remains unclear why people generate these two types of behaviors. Using the go-before-you-know task (commonly used to study behavior under choice uncertainty), we examined two key questions. First, do these two types of responses reflect distinct movement strategies, or are they simply examples of a more general response to choice uncertainty? If the former, the relative desirability (i.e., weighing the likelihood of successfully hitting the target versus the attainable reward) of the two target options might be computed differently for direct versus intermediate reaches. We showed that indeed, when exogenous reward and success likelihood (i.e., endogenous reward) differ between the two options, direct reaches were more strongly biased by likelihood whereas intermediate movements were more strongly biased by reward. Second, what drives individual differences in how people respond under uncertainty? We found that risk/reward-seeking individuals generated a larger proportion of intermediate reaches and were more sensitive to trial-to-trial changes in reward, suggesting these movements reflect a strategy to maximize reward. In contrast, risk-adverse individuals tended to generate more direct reaches in an attempt to maximize success. Together, these findings suggest that when faced with choice uncertainty, individuals adopt movement strategies consistent with their risk/reward-seeking tendency, preferentially biasing behavior toward exogenous rewards or endogenous success and consequently modulating the relative desirability of the available options.
Emotion and attention interaction: a trade-off between stimuli relevance, motivation and individual differences
