scholarly journals Confidence in action: Differences between perceived accuracy of decision and motor response

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Siedlecka ◽  
Marcin Koculak ◽  
Borysław Paulewicz
Keyword(s):  
Motor Response ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Decision Accuracy ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Error Awareness ◽  
Degree Of Confidence ◽  
Response Confidence ◽  
Trial Participants ◽  
Confidence Ratings

AbstractEach of our decisions is associated with a degree of confidence. This confidence can change once we have acted because we might start doubting our choice or even become convinced that we have made a mistake. In this study, we explore the relations between action and our confidence that our decision was correct or erroneous. Fifty-four volunteers took part in a perceptual decision task in which their decisions could either lead to action or not. At the end of each trial, participants rated their confidence that their decision was correct, or they reported that they had made an error. The main results showed that when given after a response, confidence ratings were higher and more strongly related to decision accuracy, and post-response reports of errors more often indicated actual errors. The results support the view that error awareness and confidence might be partially based on postaction processing.

scholarly journals Confidence in action: differences between perceived accuracy of decision and motor response

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Siedlecka ◽  
Marcin Koculak ◽  
Borysław Paulewicz
Keyword(s):  
Motor Response ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Decision Accuracy ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Error Awareness ◽  
Action Processing ◽  
Degree Of Confidence ◽  
Response Confidence ◽  
Trial Participants ◽  
Confidence Ratings

AbstractEach of our decisions is associated with a degree of confidence. This confidence can change once we have acted as we might start doubting our choice or even become convinced that we made a mistake. In this study, we explore the relations between action and our confidence that our decision was correct or erroneous. Fifty-six volunteers took part in a perceptual decision task in which their decisions could either lead to action or not. At the end of each trial, participants rated their confidence that their decision was correct, or they reported that they had made an error. The main results showed that when given after a response, confidence ratings were higher and more strongly related to decision accuracy, and post-response reports of errors more often indicated actual errors. The results support the view that error awareness and confidence might be partially based on post-action processing.

scholarly journals Robust sampling of decision information during perceptual choice

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (10) ◽  
pp. 2771-2776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hildward Vandormael ◽  
Santiago Herce Castañón ◽  
Jan Balaguer ◽  
Vickie Li ◽  
Christopher Summerfield
Keyword(s):  
Large Body ◽  
Reference Value ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Natural Scene ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Final Choice ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Sample Information ◽  
Scene Viewing ◽  
Spatial Locations

Humans move their eyes to gather information about the visual world. However, saccadic sampling has largely been explored in paradigms that involve searching for a lone target in a cluttered array or natural scene. Here, we investigated the policy that humans use to overtly sample information in a perceptual decision task that required information from across multiple spatial locations to be combined. Participants viewed a spatial array of numbers and judged whether the average was greater or smaller than a reference value. Participants preferentially sampled items that were less diagnostic of the correct answer (“inlying” elements; that is, elements closer to the reference value). This preference to sample inlying items was linked to decisions, enhancing the tendency to give more weight to inlying elements in the final choice (“robust averaging”). These findings contrast with a large body of evidence indicating that gaze is directed preferentially to deviant information during natural scene viewing and visual search, and suggest that humans may sample information “robustly” with their eyes during perceptual decision-making.

scholarly journals Electrophysiological correlates of confidence differ across correct and erroneous perceptual decisions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel C Feuerriegel ◽  
Mackenzie Murphy ◽  
Alexandra Konski ◽  
Jie Sun ◽  
Vinay Mepani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Decision Confidence ◽  
Amplitude Measurement ◽  
Error Positivity ◽  
Frontal Activity ◽  
Decision Errors ◽  
Confidence Ratings

Every decision we make is accompanied by an estimate of the likelihood that our decision is accurate or appropriate. This likelihood estimate is termed our degree of decision confidence. Recent work has uncovered event-related potential (ERP) correlates of confidence both during decision formation and after a decision has been made. However, the interpretation of these findings is complicated by methodological issues related to ERP amplitude measurement that are prevalent across existing studies. To more accurately characterise the neural correlates of confidence, we presented participants with a difficult perceptual decision task that elicited a broad range of confidence ratings. We identified a frontal ERP component within an onset prior to the behavioural response, which exhibited more positive-going amplitudes in trials with higher confidence ratings. This frontal effect also biased measures of the centro-parietal positivity (CPP) component at parietal electrodes via volume conduction. Amplitudes of the error positivity (Pe) component that followed each decision were negatively associated with confidence for trials with decision errors, but not for trials with correct decisions. We provide evidence for both pre- and post- decisional neural correlates of decision confidence that are observed in trials with correct and erroneous decisions, respectively. Our findings suggest that certainty in having made a correct response is associated with frontal activity during decision formation, whereas certainty in having committed an error is instead associated with the post-decisional Pe component. We additionally show that some previously reported associations between decision confidence and CPP/Pe component amplitudes are (at least partly) a consequence of ERP amplitude measurement-related confounds.

scholarly journals Overlapping and unique neural circuits are activated during perceptual decision making and confidence

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiwon Yeon ◽  
Medha Shekhar ◽  
Dobromir Rahnev
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Functional Mri ◽  
Neural Circuits ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Initial Decision ◽  
Brain Circuits ◽  
Confidence Ratings

AbstractThe period of making a perceptual decision is often followed by a period of rating confidence where one evaluates the likely accuracy of the initial decision. However, it remains unclear whether the same or different neural circuits are engaged during periods of perceptual decision making and confidence report. To address this question, we conducted two functional MRI experiments in which we dissociated the periods related to perceptual decision making and confidence report by either separating their respective regressors or asking for confidence ratings only in the second half of the experiment. We found that perceptual decision making and confidence reports gave rise to activations in large and mostly overlapping brain circuits including frontal, parietal, posterior, and cingulate regions with the results being remarkably consistent across the two experiments. Further, the confidence report period activated a number of unique regions, whereas only early sensory areas were activated for the decision period across the two experiments. We discuss the possible reasons for this overlap and explore their implications about theories of perceptual decision making and visual metacognition.

scholarly journals Dissociating the Impact of Movement Time and Energy Costs on Decision-Making and Action Initiation in Humans

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Saleri Lunazzi ◽  
Amélie J. Reynaud ◽  
David Thura
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Energy Expenditure ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Movement Initiation ◽  
Time Condition ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Action Initiation

Recent theories and data suggest that adapted behavior involves economic computations during which multiple trade-offs between reward value, accuracy requirement, energy expenditure, and elapsing time are solved so as to obtain rewards as soon as possible while spending the least possible amount of energy. However, the relative impact of movement energy and duration costs on perceptual decision-making and movement initiation is poorly understood. Here, we tested 31 healthy subjects on a perceptual decision-making task in which they executed reaching movements to report probabilistic choices. In distinct blocks of trials, the reaching duration (“Time” condition) and energy (“Effort” condition) costs were independently varied compared to a “Reference” block, while decision difficulty was maintained similar at the block level. Participants also performed a simple delayed-reaching (DR) task aimed at estimating movement initiation duration in each motor condition. Results in that DR task show that long duration movements extended reaction times (RTs) in most subjects, whereas energy-consuming movements led to mixed effects on RTs. In the decision task, about half of the subjects decreased their decision durations (DDs) in the Time condition, while the impact of energy on DDs were again mixed across subjects. Decision accuracy was overall similar across motor conditions. These results indicate that movement duration and, to a lesser extent, energy expenditure, idiosyncratically affect perceptual decision-making and action initiation. We propose that subjects who shortened their choices in the time-consuming condition of the decision task did so to limit a drop of reward rate.

scholarly journals A cortico-collicular pathway for motor planning in a memory-dependent perceptual decision task

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunyu A. Duan ◽  
Yuxin Pan ◽  
Guofen Ma ◽  
Taotao Zhou ◽  
Siyu Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brain Function ◽  
Perturbation Methods ◽  
Neural Circuit ◽  
Dynamic Environment ◽  
Motor Planning ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Cell Type ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Cell Type Specific ◽  
Sensory Evidence

ABSTRACTSurvival in a dynamic environment requires animals to plan future actions based on past sensory evidence. However, the neural circuit mechanism underlying this crucial brain function, referred to as motor planning, remains unclear. Here, we employ projection-specific imaging and perturbation methods to investigate the direct pathway linking two key nodes in the motor planning network, the secondary motor cortex (M2) and the midbrain superior colliculus (SC), in mice performing a memory-dependent perceptual decision task. We find dynamic coding of choice information in SC-projecting M2 neurons during motor planning and execution, and disruption of this information by inhibiting M2 terminals in SC selectively impaired decision maintenance. Furthermore, cell-type-specific optogenetic circuit mapping shows that M2 terminals modulate both excitatory and inhibitory SC neurons with balanced synaptic strength. Together, our results reveal the dynamic recruitment of the premotor-collicular pathway as a circuit mechanism for motor planning.

scholarly journals A common mechanism underlies changes of mind about decisions and confidence

eLife ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald van den Berg ◽  
Kavitha Anandalingam ◽  
Ariel Zylberberg ◽  
Roozbeh Kiani ◽  
Michael N Shadlen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Decision Process ◽  
Sequential Sampling ◽  
Common Mechanism ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Evidence Accumulation ◽  
Simple Processing ◽  
Degree Of Confidence ◽  
Initial Choice ◽  
Speed And Accuracy

Decisions are accompanied by a degree of confidence that a selected option is correct. A sequential sampling framework explains the speed and accuracy of decisions and extends naturally to the confidence that the decision rendered is likely to be correct. However, discrepancies between confidence and accuracy suggest that confidence might be supported by mechanisms dissociated from the decision process. Here we show that this discrepancy can arise naturally because of simple processing delays. When participants were asked to report choice and confidence simultaneously, their confidence, reaction time and a perceptual decision about motion were explained by bounded evidence accumulation. However, we also observed revisions of the initial choice and/or confidence. These changes of mind were explained by a continuation of the mechanism that led to the initial choice. Our findings extend the sequential sampling framework to vacillation about confidence and invites caution in interpreting dissociations between confidence and accuracy.

The Language of Recollection in Support of Recognition Memory Decisions

2020 ◽  
Vol 228 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian G. Dobbins ◽  
Justin Kantner
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Separate Experiment ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Verbal Reports ◽  
Language Pattern ◽  
Cognitive Decision ◽  
Pattern Classifier ◽  
Confidence Ratings

Abstract. Researchers often augment recognition memory decisions with confidence ratings or reports of “Remember” and “Know” experiences. While important, these ratings are subject to variation in interpretation and misspecification. Here we review recent findings from a “verbal reports as data” procedure in which subjects justify, in their own words, the basis of recognition. The application of a language pattern classifier to these justifications demonstrates that it: (a) is sensitive to the presence of recollection, (b) tracks individual differences in recognition accuracy, and (c) generalizes in a theoretically meaningful way to justifications from a separate experiment. More broadly, this approach should be useful for any cognitive decision task in which competing theories suggest different explicit bases underlying the judgments, or for which the explicit versus implicit basis of the decisions is in question.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document