Literature DB >> 29243134

Sensory uncertainty impacts avoidance during spatial decisions.

Kevin Jarbo1,2, Rory Flemming3,4, Timothy D Verstynen5,6.   

Abstract

When making risky spatial decisions, humans incorporate estimates of sensorimotor variability and costs on outcomes to bias their spatial selections away from regions that incur feedback penalties. Since selection variability depends on the reliability of sensory signals, increasing the spatial variance of targets during visually guided actions should increase the degree of this avoidance. Healthy adult participants (N = 20) used a computer mouse to indicate their selection of the mean of a target, represented as a 2D Gaussian distribution of dots presented on a computer display. Reward feedback on each trial corresponded to the estimation error of the selection. Either increasing or decreasing the spatial variance of the dots modulated the spatial uncertainty of the target. A non-target distractor cue was presented as an adjacent distribution of dots. On a subset of trials, feedback scores were penalized with increased proximity to the distractor mean. As expected, increasing the spatial variance of the target distribution increased selection variability. More importantly, on trials where proximity to the distractor cue incurred a penalty, increasing variance of the target increased selection bias away from the distractor cue and prolonged reaction times. These results confirm predictions that increased sensory uncertainty increases avoidance during risky spatial decisions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bias; Sensory uncertainty; Spatial risk; Target estimation and selection; Visually guided action

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29243134     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-017-5145-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  25 in total

1.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning.

Authors:  Konrad P Körding; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Statistical decision theory and trade-offs in the control of motor response.

Authors:  Julia Trommershäuser; Laurence T Maloney; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2003

3.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

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

4.  Using psychophysics to ask if the brain samples or maximizes.

Authors:  Daniel E Acuna; Max Berniker; Hugo L Fernandes; Konrad P Kording
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements.

Authors:  D E Meyer; R A Abrams; S Kornblum; C E Wright; J E Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  People are better at maximizing expected gain in a manual aiming task with rapidly changing probabilities than with rapidly changing payoffs.

Authors:  Heather F Neyedli; Timothy N Welsh
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Optimal weighting of costs and probabilities in a risky motor decision-making task requires experience.

Authors:  Heather F Neyedli; Timothy N Welsh
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Decision making, movement planning and statistical decision theory.

Authors:  Julia Trommershäuser; Laurence T Maloney; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-07-07       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Implicit knowledge of visual uncertainty guides decisions with asymmetric outcomes.

Authors:  Louise Whiteley; Maneesh Sahani
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Information sampling behavior with explicit sampling costs.

Authors:  Mordechai Z Juni; Todd M Gureckis; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2016-07
View more
  1 in total

1.  Bayesian regression explains how human participants handle parameter uncertainty.

Authors:  Jannes Jegminat; Maya A Jastrzębowska; Matthew V Pachai; Michael H Herzog; Jean-Pascal Pfister
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 4.475

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.