Humans sacrifice decision-making for action execution when a demanding control of movement is required

Atomoxetine and reward size equally improve task engagement and perceptual decisions but differently affect movement execution

Our ability to engage and perform daily activities relies on balancing the associated benefits and costs. Rewards, as benefits, act as powerful motivators that help us stay focused for longer durations. The noradrenergic (NA) system is thought to play a significant role in optimizing our performance. Yet, the interplay between reward and the NA system in shaping performance remains unclear, particularly when actions are driven by external incentives (reward). To explore this interaction, we tested four female rhesus monkeys performing a sustained Go/NoGo task under two reward sizes (low/high) and three pharmacological conditions (saline and two doses of atomoxetine, a NA reuptake inhibitor: ATX-0.5 mg/kg and ATX-1 mg/kg). We found that increasing either reward or NA levels equally enhanced the animal's engagement in the task compared to low reward saline; the animals also responded faster and more consistently under these circumstances. Notably, we identified differences between reward size and ATX. When combined with ATX, high reward further reduced the occurrence of false alarms (i.e., incorrect go trials on distractors), implying that it helped further suppress impulsive responses. In addition, ATX (but not reward size) consistently increased movement duration dose-dependently, while high reward did not affect movement duration but decreased its variability. We conclude that noradrenaline and reward modulate performance, but their effects are not identical, suggesting differential underlying mechanisms. Reward might energize/invigorate decisions and action, while ATX might help regulate energy expenditure, depending on the context, through the NA system.

Explicit effort may not influence perceptuomotor decision-making

Many decisions that humans make are enacted by the action system. For example, humans use reach-to-grasp movements when making perceptuomotor decisions between and obtaining fruits of varying quality from a pile. Recent work suggests that the characteristics of each action alternative may influence the decision itself-there may be a bias away from making perceptuomotor alternatives associated with high effort when participants are unaware of the effort differences between responses. The present study examined if perceptuomotor decisions were influenced by explicit reaching effort differences. Neurotypical human participants were presented with random dot motion stimuli in which most dots moved in random directions and varying percentages of remaining dots moved coherently left- or rightward. Participants reported leftward motion judgements by performing leftward (or left hand) reaching movements and rightward motion judgements by performing rightward (or right hand) reaching movements. A resistance band was affixed to participants' wrists and to the table in different configurations. The configurations allowed for one movement/motion direction judgement to always require stretching of the band and, therefore, require relatively more effort. Across a set of experiments, the response context (i.e. selecting directions within a limb or selecting between limbs) and the effort difference between responses were manipulated. Overall, no experiment revealed a bias away from the perceptuomotor decision associated with high effort. Based on these results, it is concluded that, in this biomechanical context, explicit effort may not influence perceptuomotor decision-making and may point to a contextual influence of action effort on perceptuomotor decision-making.

Evidence for a common mechanism supporting invigoration of action selection and action execution

The speed, or vigor, of our movements can vary depending on circumstances. For instance, the promise of a reward leads to faster movements. Reward also leads us to move with a lower reaction time, suggesting that the process of action selection can also be invigorated by reward. It has been proposed that invigoration of action selection and of action execution might occur through a common mechanism, and thus these aspects of behavior might be coupled. To test this hypothesis, we asked participants to make reaching movements to "shoot" through a target at varying speeds to assess whether moving more quickly was also associated with more rapid action selection. We found that, when participants were required to move with a lower velocity, the speed of their action selection was also significantly slowed. This finding was recapitulated in a further dataset in which participants determined their own movement speed, but had to move slowly to stop their movement inside the target. By reanalyzing a previous dataset, we also found evidence for the converse relationship between action execution and action selection; when pressured to select actions more rapidly, people also executed movements with higher velocity. Our results establish that invigoration of action selection and action execution vary in tandem with one another, supporting the hypothesis of a common underlying mechanism.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We show that voluntary increases in the vigor of action execution lead action selection to also occur more rapidly. Conversely, hastening action selection by imposing a deadline to act also leads to increases in movement speed. These findings provide evidence that these two distinct aspects of behavior are modulated by a common underlying mechanism.

Integrated control of non-motor and motor efforts during perceptual decision-making and action execution: a pilot study

Humans daily life is characterized by a succession of voluntary actions. Since energy resources are limited, the ability to invest the appropriate amount of effort for selecting and executing these actions is a hallmark of adapted behavior. Recent studies indicate that decisions and actions share important principles, including the optimization of their duration when the context requires it. In the present pilot study, we test the hypothesis that the management of effort-related energy resources is shared between decision and action too. Healthy human subjects performed a perceptual decision task where they had to choose between two levels of effort to invest in making the decision (i.e. two levels of perceptual difficulty), and report it with a reaching movement. Crucially, the movement accuracy requirement gradually increased from trial to trial depending on participants' decision performance. Results indicate an overall moderate and non-significant impact of the increasing motor difficulty on the choice of the non-motor (decision) effort to invest in each trial and on decision performance. By contrast, motor performance strongly decreased depending on both the motor and decisional difficulties. Together, the results support the hypothesis of an integrated management of the effort-related energy resources between decision and action. They also suggest that in the present task, the mutualized resources are primarily allocated to the decision-making process to the detriment of movements.

Capacity Limits Lead to Information Bottlenecks in Ongoing Rapid Motor Behaviors

Studies of ongoing, rapid motor behaviors have often focused on the decision-making implicit in the task. Here, we instead study how decision-making integrates with the perceptual and motor systems and propose a framework of limited-capacity, pipelined processing with flexible resources to understand rapid motor behaviors. Results from three experiments show that human performance is consistent with our framework: participants perform objectively worse as task difficulty increases, and, surprisingly, this drop in performance is largest for the most skilled performers. As well, our analysis shows that the worst-performing participants can perform equally well under increased task demands, which is consistent with flexible neural resources being allocated to reduce bottleneck effects and improve overall performance. We conclude that capacity limits lead to information bottlenecks and that processes like attention help reduce the effects that these bottlenecks have on maximal performance.

Movement characteristics impact decision-making and vice versa

Previous studies suggest that humans are capable of coregulating the speed of decisions and movements if promoted by task incentives. It is unclear however whether such behavior is inherent to the process of translating decisional information into movements, beyond posing a valid strategy in some task contexts. Therefore, in a behavioral online study we imposed time constraints to either decision- or movement phases of a sensorimotor task, ensuring that coregulating decisions and movements was not promoted by task incentives. We found that participants indeed moved faster when fast decisions were promoted and decided faster when subsequent finger tapping movements had to be executed swiftly. These results were further supported by drift diffusion modelling and inspection of psychophysical kernels: Sensorimotor delays related to initiating the finger tapping sequence were shorter in fast-decision as compared to slow-decision blocks. Likewise, the decisional speed-accuracy tradeoff shifted in favor of faster decisions in fast-tapping as compared to slow-tapping blocks. These findings suggest that decisions not only impact movement characteristics, but that properties of movement impact the time taken to decide. We interpret these behavioral results in the context of embodied decision-making, whereby shared neural mechanisms may modulate decisions and movements in a joint fashion.

Dynamic control of decision and movement speed in the human basal ganglia

To optimally adjust our behavior to changing environments we need to both adjust the speed of our decisions and movements. Yet little is known about the extent to which these processes are controlled by common or separate mechanisms. Furthermore, while previous evidence from computational models and empirical studies suggests that the basal ganglia play an important role during adjustments of decision-making, it remains unclear how this is implemented. Leveraging the opportunity to directly access the subthalamic nucleus of the basal ganglia in humans undergoing deep brain stimulation surgery, we here combine invasive electrophysiological recordings, electrical stimulation and computational modelling of perceptual decision-making. We demonstrate that, while similarities between subthalamic control of decision- and movement speed exist, the causal contribution of the subthalamic nucleus to these processes can be disentangled. Our results show that the basal ganglia independently control the speed of decisions and movement for each hemisphere during adaptive behavior.

Post-error Slowing Reflects the Joint Impact of Adaptive and Maladaptive Processes During Decision Making

Errors and their consequences are typically studied by investigating changes in decision speed and accuracy in trials that follow an error, commonly referred to as “post-error adjustments”. Many studies have reported that subjects slow down following an error, a phenomenon called “post-error slowing” (PES). However, the functional significance of PES is still a matter of debate as it is not always adaptive. That is, it is not always associated with a gain in performance and can even occur with a decline in accuracy. Here, we hypothesized that the nature of PES is influenced by one’s speed-accuracy tradeoff policy, which determines the overall level of choice accuracy in the task at hand. To test this hypothesis, we had subjects performing a task in two distinct contexts (separate days), which either promoted speed (hasty context) or cautiousness (cautious context), allowing us to consider post-error adjustments according to whether subjects performed choices with a low or high accuracy level, respectively. Accordingly, our data indicate that post-error adjustments varied according to the context in which subjects performed the task, with PES being solely significant in the hasty context (low accuracy). In addition, we only observed a gain in performance after errors in a specific trial type, suggesting that post-error adjustments depend on a complex combination of processes that affect the speed of ensuing actions as well as the degree to which such PES comes with a gain in performance.

Compensative movement ameliorates reduced efficacy of rapidly-embodied decisions in humans

Dynamic environments, such as sports, often demand rapid decision-making and motor execution. The concept of embodied decision refers to the mutual link between both processes, but little is known about how these processes are balanced under severe time constraints. We address this problem by using a baseball-like hitting paradigm with and without Go/No-go judgment; participants were required to hit (Go) a moving target in the strike area or not to hit (No-go) other targets. We found that Go/No-go judgments were effective with regard to task performance, but efficacy was lost below the time constraint of 0.5 seconds mainly due to a reduction in judgment accuracy rather than movement accuracy. However, either slowing movement initiation in Go trials or canceling the movement in progress in No-go trials improved judgment accuracy. Our findings suggest that embodied decision efficacy is limited in split-second periods, but compensation is possible by changing ongoing movement strategies.

Hasty sensorimotor decisions rely on an overlap of broad and selective changes in motor activity

Humans and other animals are able to adjust their speed–accuracy trade-off (SAT) at will depending on the urge to act, favoring either cautious or hasty decision policies in different contexts. An emerging view is that SAT regulation relies on influences exerting broad changes on the motor system, tuning its activity up globally when hastiness is at premium. The present study aimed to test this hypothesis. A total of 50 participants performed a task involving choices between left and right index fingers, in which incorrect choices led either to a high or to a low penalty in 2 contexts, inciting them to emphasize either cautious or hasty policies. We applied transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) on multiple motor representations, eliciting motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in 9 finger and leg muscles. MEP amplitudes allowed us to probe activity changes in the corresponding finger and leg representations, while participants were deliberating about which index to choose. Our data indicate that hastiness entails a broad amplification of motor activity, although this amplification was limited to the chosen side. On top of this effect, we identified a local suppression of motor activity, surrounding the chosen index representation. Hence, a decision policy favoring speed over accuracy appears to rely on overlapping processes producing a broad (but not global) amplification and a surround suppression of motor activity. The latter effect may help to increase the signal-to-noise ratio of the chosen representation, as supported by single-trial correlation analyses indicating a stronger differentiation of activity changes in finger representations in the hasty context.

Many have argued that the regulation of the speed-accuracy tradeoff relies on an urgency signal, which implements "collapsing decision thresholds" by tuning neural activity in a global manner in decision-related structures. This study indicates that the reality is more subtle, with several aspects of "urgency" being specifically targeted to particular corticospinal populations within the motor system.

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

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.

Age-related deficits in rapid visuomotor decision-making

Many goal-directed actions that require rapid visuomotor planning and perceptual decision-making are affected in older adults, causing difficulties in execution of many functional activities of daily living. Visuomotor planning and perceptual identification are mediated by the dorsal and ventral visual streams, respectively, but it is unclear how age-induced changes in sensory processing in these streams contribute to declines in visuomotor decision-making performance. Previously, we showed that in young adults, task demands influenced movement strategies during visuomotor decision-making, reflecting differential integration of sensory information between the two streams. Here, we asked the question if older adults would exhibit deficits in interactions between the two streams during demanding motor tasks. Older adults (n = 15) and young controls (n = 26) performed reaching or interception movements toward virtual objects. In some blocks of trials, participants also had to select an appropriate movement goal based on the shape of the object. Our results showed that older adults corrected fewer initial decision errors during both reaching and interception movements. During the interception decision task, older adults made more decision- and execution-related errors than young adults, which were related to early initiation of their movements. Together, these results suggest that older adults have a reduced ability to integrate new perceptual information to guide online action, which may reflect impaired ventral-dorsal stream interactions.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Older adults show declines in vision, decision-making, and motor control, which can lead to functional limitations. We used a rapid visuomotor decision task to examine how these deficits may interact to affect task performance. Compared with healthy young adults, older adults made more errors in both decision-making and motor execution, especially when the task required intercepting moving targets. This suggests that age-related declines in integrating perceptual and motor information may contribute to functional deficits.

Reducing behavioral dimensions to study brain-environment interactions

Movement vigor provides a window on action valuation. But what is vigor, and how to measure it in the first place? Strikingly, many different co-varying vigor-related metrics can be found in the literature. I believe this is because vigor, just like the neural circuits that determine it, is an integrated, low-dimensional parameter. As such, it can only be roughly estimated.

The Self-Prioritization Effect: Self-referential processing in movement highlights modulation at multiple stages

A wealth of recent research supports the validity of the Self-Prioritization Effect (SPE)—the performance advantage for responses to self-associated as compared with other-person-associated stimuli in a shape–label matching task. However, inconsistent findings have been reported regarding the particular stage(s) of information processing that are influenced. In one account, self-prioritization modulates multiple stages of processing, whereas according to a competing account, self-prioritization is driven solely by a modulation in central-stage information-processing. To decide between these two possibilities, the present study tested whether the self-advantage in arm movements previously reported could reflect a response bias using visual feedback (Experiment 1), or approach motivation processes (Experiments 1 and 2). In Experiment 1, visual feedback was occluded in a ballistic movement-time variant of the matching task, whereas in Experiment 2, task responses were directed away from the stimuli and the participant’s body. The advantage for self in arm-movement responses emerged in both experiments. The findings indicate that the self-advantage in arm-movement responses does not depend on the use of visual feedback or on a self/stimuli-directed response. They further indicate that self-relevance can modulate movement responses (predominantly) using proprioceptive, kinaesthetic, and tactile information. These findings support the view that self-relevance modulates arm-movement responses, countering the suggestion that self-prioritization only influences central-stage processes, and consistent with a multiple-stage influence instead.