Dataset Information

Acquisition of decision making criteria: reward rate ultimately beats accuracy.

ABSTRACT: Speed-accuracy trade-offs strongly influence the rate of reward that can be earned in many decision-making tasks. Previous reports suggest that human participants often adopt suboptimal speed-accuracy trade-offs in single session, two-alternative forced-choice tasks. We investigated whether humans acquired optimal speed-accuracy trade-offs when extensively trained with multiple signal qualities. When performance was characterized in terms of decision time and accuracy, our participants eventually performed nearly optimally in the case of higher signal qualities. Rather than adopting decision criteria that were individually optimal for each signal quality, participants adopted a single threshold that was nearly optimal for most signal qualities. However, setting a single threshold for different coherence conditions resulted in only negligible decrements in the maximum possible reward rate. Finally, we tested two hypotheses regarding the possible sources of suboptimal performance: (1) favoring accuracy over reward rate and (2) misestimating the reward rate due to timing uncertainty. Our findings provide support for both hypotheses, but also for the hypothesis that participants can learn to approach optimality. We find specifically that an accuracy bias dominates early performance, but diminishes greatly with practice. The residual discrepancy between optimal and observed performance can be explained by an adaptive response to uncertainty in time estimation.

SUBMITTER: Balci F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3383845 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acquisition of decision making criteria: reward rate ultimately beats accuracy.

Balci Fuat F Simen Patrick P Niyogi Ritwik R Saxe Andrew A Hughes Jessica A JA Holmes Philip P Cohen Jonathan D JD

Attention, perception & psychophysics 20110201 2

Speed-accuracy trade-offs strongly influence the rate of reward that can be earned in many decision-making tasks. Previous reports suggest that human participants often adopt suboptimal speed-accuracy trade-offs in single session, two-alternative forced-choice tasks. We investigated whether humans acquired optimal speed-accuracy trade-offs when extensively trained with multiple signal qualities. When performance was characterized in terms of decision time and accuracy, our participants eventuall ...[more]

PMID: 21264716

Similar Datasets

Project description:Most of our daily decisions are governed by one of two systems: an impulsive system driving instantaneous decisions and a deliberative system driving thoughtful ones. The impulsive system reacts to immediately available concrete rewards. In contrast, the deliberative system reacts to more delayed rewards and/or punishments, which imposes consideration of longer-term choice consequences. Contingency management for addiction treatment is hypothesized to engage deliberative processes. Ultimately, in both decision-making situations, an action is needed to enact the decision. Whether those actions differ in implementation is an open question whose answer could inform as to whether distinct neural systems are engaged. To explore whether there is evidence of separate mechanisms between deliberated and immediate choices, we trained monkeys to perform a decision-making task where they made a choice on a touch screen between two visual cues predicting different amounts of reward. In immediate choice (IC) trials, the cues appeared at the final response locations where subjects could immediately touch the chosen cue. In deliberated choice (DC) trials, compound cues appeared orthogonally to the response locations. After a delay, allowing for decision formation, an identifying cue component was displaced to the randomly assigned response locations, permitting subjects to reach for the chosen cue. Both trial types showed an effect of cue value on cue selection time. However, only IC trials showed an effect of the competing cue on response vigor (measured by movement duration) and a reach trajectory that deviated in the direction of the competing cue, suggesting a decision reexamination process. Reward modulation of response vigor implicates dopaminergic mechanisms. In DC trials, reach trajectories revealed a commitment to the chosen choice target, and reach vigor was not modulated by the value of the competing cue. Our results suggest that choice-action dynamics are shaped by competing offers only during instantaneous, impulsive choice. After a deliberated decision, choice-action dynamics are unaffected by the alternative offer cue, demonstrating a commitment to the choice. The potential relevance to contingency management is discussed.

Dataset Information

Acquisition of decision making criteria: reward rate ultimately beats accuracy.

Publications

Acquisition of decision making criteria: reward rate ultimately beats accuracy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets