Literature DB >> 19746300

Do humans produce the speed-accuracy trade-off that maximizes reward rate?

Rafal Bogacz1, Peter T Hu, Philip J Holmes, Jonathan D Cohen.   

Abstract

In this paper we investigate trade-offs between speed and accuracy that are produced by humans when confronted with a sequence of choices between two alternatives. We assume that the choice process is described by the drift diffusion model, in which the speed-accuracy trade-off is primarily controlled by the value of the decision threshold. We test the hypothesis that participants choose the decision threshold that maximizes reward rate, defined as an average number of rewards per unit of time. In particular, we test four predictions derived on the basis of this hypothesis in two behavioural experiments. The data from all participants of our experiments provide support only for some of the predictions, and on average the participants are slower and more accurate than predicted by reward rate maximization. However, when we limit our analysis to subgroups of 30-50% of participants who earned the highest overall rewards, all the predictions are satisfied by the data. This suggests that a substantial subset of participants do select decision thresholds that maximize reward rate. We also discuss possible reasons why the remaining participants select thresholds higher than optimal, including the possibility that participants optimize a combination of reward rate and accuracy or that they compensate for the influence of timing uncertainty, or both.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19746300      PMCID: PMC2908414          DOI: 10.1080/17470210903091643

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)        ISSN: 1747-0218            Impact factor:   2.143


  31 in total

1.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model.

Authors:  M Usher; J L McClelland
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Francis Tuerlinckx
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-09

3.  The influence of behavioral context on the representation of a perceptual decision in developing oculomotor commands.

Authors:  Joshua I Gold; Michael N Shadlen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-01-15       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on brightness discrimination.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Anjali Thapar; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2003-05

5.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision.

Authors:  John Palmer; Alexander C Huk; Michael N Shadlen
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-05-02       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 7.  The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.026

8.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

9.  Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the rhesus monkey.

Authors:  M N Shadlen; W T Newsome
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Robust versus optimal strategies for two-alternative forced choice tasks.

Authors:  M Zacksenhouse; R Bogacz; P Holmes
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 2.223

View more
  49 in total

1.  Age-related differences in diffusion model boundary optimality with both trial-limited and time-limited tasks.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Starns; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-02

2.  Confidence predicts speed-accuracy tradeoff for subsequent decisions.

Authors:  Kobe Desender; Annika Boldt; Tom Verguts; Tobias H Donner
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 3.  Towards a mechanistic understanding of the human subcortex.

Authors:  Birte U Forstmann; Gilles de Hollander; Leendert van Maanen; Anneke Alkemade; Max C Keuken
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 34.870

4.  A statistical test for the optimality of deliberative time allocation.

Authors:  Rahul Bhui
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-06

5.  A cognitive model-based approach to testing mechanistic explanations for neuropsychological decrements during tobacco abstinence.

Authors:  Alexander Weigard; Cynthia Huang-Pollock; Andrew Heathcote; Larry Hawk; Nicolas J Schlienz
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 4.530

6.  Optimizing sequential decisions in the drift-diffusion model.

Authors:  Khanh P Nguyen; Krešimir Josić; Zachary P Kilpatrick
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 2.223

7.  Bias in the brain: a diffusion model analysis of prior probability and potential payoff.

Authors:  Martijn J Mulder; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Roger Ratcliff; Wouter Boekel; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Reward rate optimization in two-alternative decision making: empirical tests of theoretical predictions.

Authors:  Patrick Simen; David Contreras; Cara Buck; Peter Hu; Philip Holmes; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 9.  Probabilistic vs. non-probabilistic approaches to the neurobiology of perceptual decision-making.

Authors:  Jan Drugowitsch; Alexandre Pouget
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 6.627

10.  Accuracy and response-time distributions for decision-making: linear perfect integrators versus nonlinear attractor-based neural circuits.

Authors:  Paul Miller; Donald B Katz
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-23       Impact factor: 1.621

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.