Dataset Information

Opposite effects of choice history and evidence history resolve a paradox of sequential choice bias.

ABSTRACT: Perceptual decisions are biased toward previous decisions. Earlier research suggests that this choice repetition bias is increased after previous decisions of high confidence, as inferred from response time measures (Urai, Braun, & Donner, 2017), but also when previous decisions were based on weak sensory evidence (Akaishi, Umeda, Nagase, & Sakai, 2014). As weak sensory evidence is typically associated with low confidence, these previous findings appear conflicting. To resolve this conflict, we set out to investigate the effect of decision confidence on choice repetition more directly by measuring explicit confidence ratings in a motion coherence discrimination task. Moreover, we explored how choice and evidence history jointly affect subsequent perceptual choices. We found that participants were more likely to repeat previous choices of high subjective confidence, as well as previous fast choices, confirming the boost of choice repetition with decision confidence. Furthermore, we discovered that current choices were biased away from the previous evidence direction and that this effect grew with previous evidence strength. These findings point toward simultaneous biases of choice repetition, modulated by decision confidence, and evidence adaptation, modulated by the strength of evidence, which bias current perceptual decisions in opposite directions.

SUBMITTER: Bosch E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7683864 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Opposite effects of choice history and evidence history resolve a paradox of sequential choice bias.

Bosch Ella E Fritsche Matthias M Ehinger Benedikt V BV de Lange Floris P FP

Journal of vision 20201101 12

Perceptual decisions are biased toward previous decisions. Earlier research suggests that this choice repetition bias is increased after previous decisions of high confidence, as inferred from response time measures (Urai, Braun, & Donner, 2017), but also when previous decisions were based on weak sensory evidence (Akaishi, Umeda, Nagase, & Sakai, 2014). As weak sensory evidence is typically associated with low confidence, these previous findings appear conflicting. To resolve this conflict, we ...[more]

PMID: 33211062

Similar Datasets

Project description:Choice history effects describe how future choices depend on the history of past choices. In experimental tasks this is typically framed as a bias because it often diminishes the experienced reward rates. However, in natural habitats, choices made in the past constrain choices that can be made in the future. For foraging animals, the probability of earning a reward in a given patch depends on the degree to which the animals have exploited the patch in the past. One problem with many experimental tasks that show choice history effects is that such tasks artificially decouple choice history from its consequences on reward availability over time. To circumvent this, we use a variable interval (VI) reward schedule that reinstates a more natural contingency between past choices and future reward availability. By examining the behavior of optimal agents in the VI task we discover that choice history effects observed in animals serve to maximize reward harvesting efficiency. We further distil the function of choice history effects by manipulating first- and second-order statistics of the environment. We find that choice history effects primarily reflect the growth rate of the reward probability of the unchosen option, whereas reward history effects primarily reflect environmental volatility. Based on observed choice history effects in animals, we develop a reinforcement learning model that explicitly incorporates choice history over multiple time scales into the decision process, and we assess its predictive adequacy in accounting for the associated behavior. We show that this new variant, known as the double trace model, has a higher performance in predicting choice data, and shows near optimal reward harvesting efficiency in simulated environments. These results suggests that choice history effects may be adaptive for natural contingencies between consumption and reward availability. This concept lends credence to a normative account of choice history effects that extends beyond its description as a bias.

Dataset Information

Opposite effects of choice history and evidence history resolve a paradox of sequential choice bias.

Publications

Opposite effects of choice history and evidence history resolve a paradox of sequential choice bias.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets