Magnitude-sensitivity: rethinking decision-making

Interaction Rules Supporting Effective Flocking Behavior

Several simulation models have demonstrated how flocking behavior emerges from the interaction among individuals that react to the relative orientation of their neighbors based on simple rules. However, the precise nature of these rules and the relationship between the characteristics of the rules and the efficacy of the resulting collective behavior are unknown. In this article, we analyze the effect of the strength with which individuals react to the orientation of neighbors located in different sectors of their visual fields and the benefit that could be obtained by using control rules that are more elaborate than those normally used. Our results demonstrate that considering only neighbors located on the frontal side of the visual field permits an increase in the aggregation level of the swarm. Using more complex rules and/or additional sensory information does not lead to better performance.

Thoughts from the forest floor: a review of cognition in the slime mould Physarum polycephalum

Sensing, communication, navigation, decision-making, memory and learning are key components in a standard cognitive tool-kit that enhance an animal's ability to successfully survive and reproduce. However, these tools are not only useful for, or accessible to, animals-they evolved long ago in simpler organisms using mechanisms which may be either unique or widely conserved across diverse taxa. In this article, I review the recent research that demonstrates these key cognitive abilities in the plasmodial slime mould Physarum polycephalum, which has emerged as a model for non-animal cognition. I discuss the benefits and limitations of comparisons drawn between neural and non-neural systems, and the implications of common mechanisms across wide taxonomic divisions. I conclude by discussing future avenues of research that will draw the most benefit from a closer integration of Physarum and animal cognition research.

Critical tests of fuzzy trace theory in brain and behavior: uncertainty across time, probability, and development

Uncertainty permeates decisions from the trivial to the profound. Integrating brain and behavioral evidence, we discuss how probabilistic (varied outcomes) and temporal (delayed outcomes) uncertainty differ across age and individuals; how critical tests adjudicate between theories of uncertainty (prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory); and how these mechanisms might be represented in the brain. The same categorical gist representations of gains and losses account for choices and eye-tracking data in both value-allocation (add money to gambles) and risky-choice tasks, disconfirming prospect theory and confirming predictions of fuzzy-trace theory. The analysis is extended to delay discounting and disambiguated choices, explaining hidden-zero effects that similarly turn on categorical distinctions between some gain and no gain, certain gain and uncertain gain, gain and loss, and now and later. Bold activation implicates dorsolateral prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices in gist strategies that are not just one tool in a grab-bag of cognitive options but rather are general strategies that systematically predict behaviors across many different tasks involving probabilistic and temporal uncertainty. High valuation (e.g., ventral striatum; ventromedial prefrontal cortex) and low executive control (e.g., lateral prefrontal cortex) contribute to risky and impatient choices, especially in youth. However, valuation in ventral striatum supports reward-maximizing and gist strategies in adulthood. Indeed, processing becomes less "rational" in the sense of maximizing gains and more noncompensatory (eye movements indicate fewer tradeoffs) as development progresses from adolescence to adulthood, as predicted. Implications for theoretically predicted "public-health paradoxes" are discussed, including gist versus verbatim thinking in drug experimentation and addiction.

Toward an Atlas of Canonical Cognitive Mechanisms

A central goal in Cognitive Science is understanding the mechanisms that underlie cognition. Here, we contend that Cognitive Science, despite intense multidisciplinary efforts, has furnished surprisingly few mechanistic insights. We attribute this slow mechanistic progress to the fact that cognitive scientists insist on performing underdetermined exercises, deriving overparametrized mechanistic theories of complex behaviors and seeking validation of these theories to the elusive notions of optimality and biological plausibility. We propose that mechanistic progress in Cognitive Science will accelerate once cognitive scientists start focusing on simpler explananda that will enable them to chart an atlas of elementary cognitive operations. Looking forward, the next challenge for Cognitive Science will be to understand how these elementary cognitive processes are pieced together to explain complex behavior.

Assessing evidence accumulation and rule learning in humans with an online game

Evidence accumulation, an essential component of perception and decision making, is frequently studied with psychophysical tasks involving noisy or ambiguous stimuli. In these tasks, participants typically receive verbal or written instructions that describe the strategy that should be used to guide decisions. Although convenient and effective, explicit instructions can influence learning and decision making strategies and can limit comparisons with animal models, in which behaviors are reinforced through feedback. Here, we developed an online video game and nonverbal training pipeline, inspired by pulse-based tasks for rodents, as an alternative to traditional psychophysical tasks used to study evidence accumulation. Using this game, we collected behavioral data from hundreds of participants trained with an explicit description of the decision rule or with experiential feedback. Participants trained with feedback alone learned the game rules rapidly and used strategies and displayed biases similar to those who received explicit instructions. Finally, by leveraging data across hundreds of participants, we show that perceptual judgments were well described by an accumulation process in which noise scaled nonlinearly with evidence, consistent with previous animal studies but inconsistent with diffusion models widely used to describe perceptual decisions in humans. These results challenge the conventional description of the accumulation process and suggest that online games provide a valuable platform to examine perceptual decision making and learning in humans. In addition, the feedback-based training pipeline developed for this game may be useful for evaluating perceptual decision making in human populations with difficulty following verbal instructions.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Perceptual uncertainty sets critical constraints on our ability to accumulate evidence and make decisions; however, its sources remain unclear. We developed a video game, and feedback-based training pipeline, to study uncertainty during decision making. Leveraging choices from hundreds of subjects, we demonstrate that human choices are inconsistent with popular diffusion models of human decision making and instead are best fit by models in which perceptual uncertainty scales nonlinearly with the strength of sensory evidence.

Magnitude-sensitive reaction times reveal non-linear time costs in multi-alternative decision-making

Optimality analysis of value-based decisions in binary and multi-alternative choice settings predicts that reaction times should be sensitive only to differences in stimulus magnitudes, but not to overall absolute stimulus magnitude. Yet experimental work in the binary case has shown magnitude sensitive reaction times, and theory shows that this can be explained by switching from linear to multiplicative time costs, but also by nonlinear subjective utility. Thus disentangling explanations for observed magnitude sensitive reaction times is difficult. Here for the first time we extend the theoretical analysis of geometric time-discounting to ternary choices, and present novel experimental evidence for magnitude-sensitivity in such decisions, in both humans and slime moulds. We consider the optimal policies for all possible combinations of linear and geometric time costs, and linear and nonlinear utility; interestingly, geometric discounting emerges as the predominant explanation for magnitude sensitivity.

Analysis of decisions based on option value (e.g. which pile of coins would you like?) suggests that the optimal rules correspond to simple mechanisms also known to be optimal for perceptual decisions (e.g. which light is brighter?) But, crucially, these analyses assume that the cost of time is linear—when the more usual assumption is made that time discounts multiplicatively (e.g. ‘a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush (and so two in the hand are worth four in the bush)’) then optimal decision-making looks quite different—in particular, the theory predicts that decision-making should be sensitive to the absolute magnitude of the opportunities, such as coin pile sizes, under consideration, in a way that the optimal perceptual mechanisms are not. As well as the theory, we present novel experimental evidence from human decision-making experiments, and foraging slime mould, of precisely such magnitude-sensitivity. This is a rare example of theory in behaviour making a falsifiable prediction that is confirmed in two, highly divergent, species, one with a brain and one without.