High-value decisions are fast and accurate, inconsistent with diminishing value sensitivity

Origins of noise in both improving and degrading decision making

Noise is a fundamental problem for information processing in neural systems. In decision-making, noise is assumed to have a primary role in errors and stochastic choice behavior. However, little is known about how noise arising from different sources contributes to value coding and choice behaviors, especially when it interacts with neural computation. Here we examine how noise arising early versus late in the choice process differentially impacts context-dependent choice behavior. We found in model simulations that early and late noise predict opposing context effects: under early noise, contextual information enhances choice accuracy; while under late noise, context degrades choice accuracy. Furthermore, we verified these opposing predictions in experimental human choice behavior. Manipulating early and late noise - by inducing uncertainty in option values and controlling time pressure - produced dissociable positive and negative context effects. These findings reconcile controversial experimental findings in the literature reporting either context-driven impairments or improvements in choice performance, suggesting a unified mechanism for context-dependent choice. More broadly, these findings highlight how different sources of noise can interact with neural computations to differentially modulate behavior.

Significance

The current study addresses the role of noise origin in decision-making, reconciling controversies around how decision-making is impacted by context. We demonstrate that different types of noise - either arising early during evaluation or late during option comparison - leads to distinct results: with early noise, context enhances choice accuracy, while with late noise, context impairs it. Understanding these dynamics offers potential strategies for improving decision-making in noisy environments and refining existing neural computation models. Overall, our findings advance our understanding of how neural systems handle noise in essential cognitive tasks, suggest a beneficial role for contextual modulation under certain conditions, and highlight the profound implications of noise structure in decision-making.

Parallel processing of value-related information during multi-attribute decisions

When choosing between options with multiple attributes, do we integrate all attributes into a unified measure for comparison, or does the comparison also occur at the level of each attribute, involving parallel processes that can dynamically influence each other? What happens when independent sensory features all carry information about the same decision factor, such as reward value? To investigate these questions, we asked human participants to perform a two-alternative forced choice reaching task in which the reward value of a target was indicated by two visual attributes-its brightness ("bottom-up," BU feature) and its orientation ("top-down," TD feature). If decisions always occur after the integration of both features, there should be no difference in the reaction time (RT) regardless of the attribute combinations that drove the choice. Counter to that prediction, RT distributions depended on the attribute combinations of given targets and the choices made by participants. RTs were shortest when both attributes were congruent or when the choice was based on the bottom-up feature, and longer when the attributes were in conflict (favoring opposite options). In conflict trials, nearly two-thirds of participants made faster decisions when choosing the option favored by the bottom-up feature than when choosing the top-down-favored option. We also observed mid-reach changes-of-mind in a subset of conflict trials, mostly changing from the bottom-up to the top-down-favored target. These data suggest that multi-attribute value-based decisions are better explained by a distributed process including competition among different features than by a competition based on a single, integrated estimate of value.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We show that during value-based decisions, humans do not always use all reward-related information to make their choice, but instead can "jump the gun" using partial information. In particular, when different sources of information were in conflict, early decisions were mostly based on fast bottom-up information, and sometimes followed by corrective changes-of-mind based on slower top-down information. This supports parallel decision processes among different information sources, as opposed to a single integrated "common currency."

Measuring utility with diffusion models

The drift diffusion model (DDM) is a prominent account of how people make decisions. Many of these decisions involve comparing two alternatives based on differences of perceived stimulus magnitudes, such as economic values. Here, we propose a consistent estimator for the parameters of a DDM in such cases. This estimator allows us to derive decision thresholds, drift rates, and subjective percepts (i.e., utilities in economic choice) directly from the experimental data. This eliminates the need to measure these values separately or to assume specific functional forms for them. Our method also allows one to predict drift rates for comparisons that did not occur in the dataset. We apply the method to two datasets, one comparing probabilities of earning a fixed reward and one comparing objects of variable reward value. Our analysis indicates that both datasets conform well to the DDM. We find that utilities are linear in probability and slightly convex in reward.

Microgravity induces overconfidence in perceptual decision-making

Does gravity affect decision-making? This question comes into sharp focus as plans for interplanetary human space missions solidify. In the framework of Bayesian brain theories, gravity encapsulates a strong prior, anchoring agents to a reference frame via the vestibular system, informing their decisions and possibly their integration of uncertainty. What happens when such a strong prior is altered? We address this question using a self-motion estimation task in a space analog environment under conditions of altered gravity. Two participants were cast as remote drone operators orbiting Mars in a virtual reality environment on board a parabolic flight, where both hyper- and microgravity conditions were induced. From a first-person perspective, participants viewed a drone exiting a cave and had to first predict a collision and then provide a confidence estimate of their response. We evoked uncertainty in the task by manipulating the motion's trajectory angle. Post-decision subjective confidence reports were negatively predicted by stimulus uncertainty, as expected. Uncertainty alone did not impact overt behavioral responses (performance, choice) differentially across gravity conditions. However microgravity predicted higher subjective confidence, especially in interaction with stimulus uncertainty. These results suggest that variables relating to uncertainty affect decision-making distinctly in microgravity, highlighting the possible need for automatized, compensatory mechanisms when considering human factors in space research.

The neural correlates of value representation: From single items to bundles

One of the core questions in Neuro-economics is to determine where value is represented. To date, most studies have focused on simple options and identified the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) as the common value region. We report the findings of an fMRI study in which we asked participants to make pairwise comparisons involving options of varying complexity: single items (Control condition), bundles made of the same two single items (Scaling condition) and bundles made of two different single items (Bundling condition). We construct a measure of choice consistency to capture how coherent the choices of a participant are with one another. We also record brain activity while participants make these choices. We find that a common core of regions involving the left VMPFC, the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), regions associated with complex visual processing and the left cerebellum track value across all conditions. Also, regions in the DLPFC, the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC) and the cerebellum are differentially recruited across conditions. Last, variations in activity in VMPFC and DLPFC value-tracking regions are associated with variations in choice consistency. This suggests that value based decision-making recruits a core set of regions as well as specific regions based on task demands. Further, correlations between consistency and the magnitude of signal change with lateral portions of the PFC suggest the possibility that activity in these regions may play a causal role in decision quality.

Phantom controllers: Misspecified models create the false appearance of adaptive control during value-based choice

Decision scientists have grown increasingly interested in how people adaptively control their decision making. Researchers have demonstrated that parameters governing the accumulation of evidence towards a choice, such as the decision threshold, are shaped by information available prior to or in parallel with one's evaluation of an option set (e.g., recent outcomes or choice conflict). A recent account has taken a bold leap forward in this approach, suggesting that adjustments in decision parameters can be motivated by the value of the options under consideration. This motivated control account predicts that when faced with difficult choices (similarly valued options) under time pressure, people will adaptively lower their decision threshold to ensure that they make a choice in time. This account was supported by drift diffusion modeling of a deadlined choice task, demonstrating that decision thresholds decrease for difficult relative to easy choices. Here, we reanalyze the data from this experiment, and show that evidence for this novel account does not hold up to further scrutiny. Using a more systematic and comprehensive modeling approach, we show that this previously observed threshold adjustment disappears (or even reverses) under a more complete model of the data. Importantly, we further show how this and other apparent evidence for motivated control arises as an artifact of model (mis)specification, where one model's putatively controlled decision process (e.g., value-driven threshold adjustments) can mimic another model's stimulus-driven decision processes (e.g., accumulator competition or collapsing bounds). Collectively, this work reveals crucial insights and constraints in the pursuit of understanding how control guides decision-making, and when it doesn't.

Value certainty and choice confidence are multidimensional constructs that guide decision-making

The degree of certainty that decision-makers have about their evaluations of available choice alternatives and their confidence about selecting the subjectively best alternative are important factors that affect current and future value-based choices. Assessments of the alternatives in a given choice set are rarely unidimensional; their values are usually derived from a combination of multiple distinct attributes. For example, the taste, texture, quantity, and nutritional content of a snack food may all be considered when determining whether to consume it. We examined how certainty about the levels of individual attributes of an option relates to certainty about the overall value of that option as a whole and/or to confidence in having chosen the subjectively best available option. We found that certainty and confidence are derived from unequally weighted combinations of attribute certainties rather than simple, equal combinations of all sources of uncertainty. Attributes that matter more in determining choice outcomes also are weighted more in metacognitive evaluations of certainty or confidence. Moreover, we found that the process of deciding between two alternatives leads to refinements in both attribute estimations and the degree of certainty in those estimates. Attributes that are more important in determining choice outcomes are refined more during the decision process in terms of both estimates and certainty. Although certainty and confidence are typically treated as unidimensional, our results indicate that they, like value estimates, are subjective, multidimensional constructs.

EEG-representational geometries and psychometric distortions in approximate numerical judgment

When judging the average value of sample stimuli (e.g., numbers) people tend to either over- or underweight extreme sample values, depending on task context. In a context of overweighting, recent work has shown that extreme sample values were overly represented also in neural signals, in terms of an anti-compressed geometry of number samples in multivariate electroencephalography (EEG) patterns. Here, we asked whether neural representational geometries may also reflect a relative underweighting of extreme values (i.e., compression) which has been observed behaviorally in a great variety of tasks. We used a simple experimental manipulation (instructions to average a single-stream or to compare dual-streams of samples) to induce compression or anti-compression in behavior when participants judged rapid number sequences. Model-based representational similarity analysis (RSA) replicated the previous finding of neural anti-compression in the dual-stream task, but failed to provide evidence for neural compression in the single-stream task, despite the evidence for compression in behavior. Instead, the results indicated enhanced neural processing of extreme values in either task, regardless of whether extremes were over- or underweighted in subsequent behavioral choice. We further observed more general differences in the neural representation of the sample information between the two tasks. Together, our results indicate a mismatch between sample-level EEG geometries and behavior, which raises new questions about the origin of common psychometric distortions, such as diminishing sensitivity for larger values.

Trial-by-trial fluctuations in amygdala activity track motivational enhancement of desirable sensory evidence during perceptual decision-making

People are biased toward seeing outcomes that they are motivated to see. For example, wanting their favored team to prevail biases sports fans to perceive an ambiguous foul in a manner that is favorable to the team they support. Here, we test the hypothesis that such motivational biases in perceptual decision-making are associated with amygdala activity. We used monetary incentives to experimentally manipulate participants to want to see one percept over another while they performed a categorization task involving ambiguous images. Participants were more likely to categorize an image as the category we motivated them to see, suggesting that wanting to see a particular percept biased their perceptual decisions. Heightened amygdala activity was associated with motivation consistent categorizations and tracked trial-by-trial enhancement of neural activity in sensory cortices encoding the desirable category. Analyses using a drift diffusion model further suggest that trial-by-trial amygdala activity was specifically associated with biases in the accumulation of sensory evidence. In contrast, frontoparietal regions commonly associated with biases in perceptual decision-making were not associated with motivational bias. Altogether, our results suggest that wanting to see an outcome biases perceptual decisions via distinct mechanisms and may depend on dynamic fluctuations in amygdala activity.