Cargando…

What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?

Rapid-choice decision-making is biased by prior probability of response alternatives. Conventionally, prior probability effects are assumed to selectively affect, response threshold, which determines the amount of evidence required to trigger a decision. However, there may also be effects on the rat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Puri, Rohan, Hinder, Mark R., Heathcote, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10328325/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37418378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288085
_version_ 1785069773060571136
author Puri, Rohan
Hinder, Mark R.
Heathcote, Andrew
author_facet Puri, Rohan
Hinder, Mark R.
Heathcote, Andrew
author_sort Puri, Rohan
collection PubMed
description Rapid-choice decision-making is biased by prior probability of response alternatives. Conventionally, prior probability effects are assumed to selectively affect, response threshold, which determines the amount of evidence required to trigger a decision. However, there may also be effects on the rate at which evidence is accumulated and the time required for non-decision processes (e.g., response production). Healthy young (n = 21) and older (n = 20) adults completed a choice response-time task requiring left- or right-hand responses to imperative stimuli. Prior probability was manipulated using a warning stimulus that informed participants that a particular response was 70% likely (i.e., the imperative stimulus was either congruent or incongruent with the warning stimulus). In addition, prior probability was either fixed for blocks of trials (block-wise bias) or varied from trial-to-trial (trial-wise bias). Response time and accuracy data were analysed using the racing diffusion evidence-accumulation model to test the selective influence assumption. Response times for correct responses were slower on incongruent than congruent trials, and older adults’ responses were slower, but more accurate, than young adults. Evidence-accumulation modelling favoured an effect of prior probability on both response thresholds and nondecision time. Overall, the current results cast doubt on the selective threshold influence assumption in the racing diffusion model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10328325
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103283252023-07-08 What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making? Puri, Rohan Hinder, Mark R. Heathcote, Andrew PLoS One Research Article Rapid-choice decision-making is biased by prior probability of response alternatives. Conventionally, prior probability effects are assumed to selectively affect, response threshold, which determines the amount of evidence required to trigger a decision. However, there may also be effects on the rate at which evidence is accumulated and the time required for non-decision processes (e.g., response production). Healthy young (n = 21) and older (n = 20) adults completed a choice response-time task requiring left- or right-hand responses to imperative stimuli. Prior probability was manipulated using a warning stimulus that informed participants that a particular response was 70% likely (i.e., the imperative stimulus was either congruent or incongruent with the warning stimulus). In addition, prior probability was either fixed for blocks of trials (block-wise bias) or varied from trial-to-trial (trial-wise bias). Response time and accuracy data were analysed using the racing diffusion evidence-accumulation model to test the selective influence assumption. Response times for correct responses were slower on incongruent than congruent trials, and older adults’ responses were slower, but more accurate, than young adults. Evidence-accumulation modelling favoured an effect of prior probability on both response thresholds and nondecision time. Overall, the current results cast doubt on the selective threshold influence assumption in the racing diffusion model. Public Library of Science 2023-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10328325/ /pubmed/37418378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288085 Text en © 2023 Puri et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Puri, Rohan
Hinder, Mark R.
Heathcote, Andrew
What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title_full What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title_fullStr What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title_full_unstemmed What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title_short What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
title_sort what mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10328325/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37418378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288085
work_keys_str_mv AT purirohan whatmechanismsmediatepriorprobabilityeffectsonrapidchoicedecisionmaking
AT hindermarkr whatmechanismsmediatepriorprobabilityeffectsonrapidchoicedecisionmaking
AT heathcoteandrew whatmechanismsmediatepriorprobabilityeffectsonrapidchoicedecisionmaking