[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal & Policies
Editorial Board
Articles Archive::
Current Issue
All Issues
Guide for Authors::
Author instructions
Guide for publishing in journal
Submission Form
Author's consent form
For Reviewers::
Reviewers Section
Ethical Statements::
Registration::
Registration Form
Site Facilities::
Site map
Inform to friends
Contact us::
Contact Information
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
Copyright Policies

 

AWT IMAGE

 
..
Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

..
:: Volume 11, Issue 1 (Winter 2022) ::
Shefaye Khatam 2022, 11(1): 25-36 Back to browse issues page
There is a Threshold for Decision's Confidence in Hierarchical Perceptual Decision-Making
Amir Mahmood Mousavi Harris , Jamal Esmaily , Sajjad Zabbah , Reza Ebrahimpour *
a. Faculty of Computer Engineering, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran. b. Research Institute of Cognitive Sciences, Institute of Basic Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran. c. Center for Cognitive Science, Institute for Convergence Science and Technology, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran , ebrahimpour@ipm.ir
Abstract:   (758 Views)
Introduction: Decision-making is one of the high orders of the brain’s cognitive functions. Most real-world decisions must be made in the face of uncertainty, and human’s process received information from the environment hierarchically. However, in the presence of hierarchy, the sources of the received negative feedback are ambiguous. Therefore, understanding how people reason with incomplete and ambiguous information is one of the main problems of cognitive psychology. People resolve this ambiguity after one or more attempts by evaluating the number of negative feedbacks, the choice confidence, and the expected accuracy of their choice. However, it is not well understood how confidence in lower-level decisions affects higher-level decisions. Materials and Methods: We tested this hypothesis with a hierarchical decision-making task in which the subjects participated in a psychophysical experiment to determine the direction of random points and report their confidence about the decision. They were also instructed to make a high-level decision called "environment". From the collected behavioral data, the effects of each factor in hierarchical decisions were statistically isolated and studied by a logistic regression model. Results: We observed that the average confidence of individuals in the face of consecutive negative feedback has an increasing trend as they approach the switch trial. In the switch trial, it reaches its highest value, which is also higher than the overall average of confidence. Conclusion: The present study indicates that decision confidence–In the consecutive errors- modulate the switch profile and encodes the probability of switches. These results highlight the critical rule of confidence in hierarchical decision-making and point out that it has a threshold for high-level decision.
Keywords: Psychology, Environment, Probability
Full-Text [PDF 918 kb]   (862 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research --- Open Access, CC-BY-NC | Subject: Cognitive Neuroscience
References
1. Newell BR, Lagnado DA, Shanks DR. Straight choices: The psychology of decision making: Psychology Press. 2015.
2. Olsen K, Roepstorff A, Bang D. Knowing whom to learn from: individual differences in metacognition and weighting of social information. 2019. [DOI:10.31234/osf.io/jqheu]
3. Carandini M, Churchland AK. Probing perceptual decisions in rodents. Nature neuroscience. 2013; 16(7): 824-31. [DOI:10.1038/nn.3410]
4. Drugowitsch J, Moreno-Bote R, Churchland AK, Shadlen MN, Pouget A. The cost of accumulating evidence .in perceptual decision making. Journal of Neuroscience. 2012; 32(11): 3612-28 [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4010-11.2012]
5. 5Wang X-J. Probabilistic decision making by slow reverberation in cortical circuits. Neuron. 2002;36(5):955-68. [DOI:10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01092-9]
6. Koukouli F, Rooy M, Tziotis D, Sailor KA, O'Neill HC, Levenga J, et al. Nicotine reverses hypofrontality in .animal models of addiction and schizophrenia. Nature Medicine. 2017; 23(3): 347-54 [DOI:10.1038/nm.4274]
7. Camerer C, Loewenstein G, Prelec D. Neuroeconomics: How neuroscience can inform economics. Journal of .economic Literature. 2005; 43(1): 9-64 [DOI:10.1257/0022051053737843]
8. Glimcher PW, Fehr E. Neuroeconomics: Decision making and the brain: Academic Press; 2013.
9. Braddon-Mitchell D, Jackson F. Philosophy Of Mind And Cognition: an introduction.(ed.) Malden. Mass Blackwell. 2007:49.
10. Britten KH, Newsome WT, Shadlen MN, Celebrini S, Movshon JA. A relationship between behavioral choice .and the visual responses of neurons in macaque MT. Visual neuroscience. 1996; 13(1): 87-100 [DOI:10.1017/S095252380000715X]
11. Esch T, Mesce KA, Kristan WB. Evidence for sequential decision making in the medicinal leech. Journal of .Neuroscience. 2002; 22(24): 11045-54 [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-24-11045.2002]
12. Hanks TD, Summerfield C. Perceptual decision making in rodents, monkeys, and humans. Neuron 2017; 93(1): 15-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.003]
13. Gold JI, Shadlen MN. The neural basis of decision making. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007; 30: 535-74 . [DOI:10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038]
14. Shadlen MN, Newsome WT. Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the .rhesus monkey. Journal of neurophysiology. 2001; 86(4): 1916-36 [DOI:10.1152/jn.2001.86.4.1916]
15. Britten KH, Shadlen MN, Newsome WT, Movshon JA. The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of .neuronal and psychophysical performance. Journal of Neuroscience. 1992; 12(12): 4745-65 [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.12-12-04745.1992]
16. Kiani R, Churchland AK, Shadlen MN. Integration of direction cues is invariant to the temporal gap between .them. Journal of Neuroscience. 2013; 33(42): 16483-9 [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2094-13.2013]
17. Vafaei S, Ebrahimpour R, Zabbah S. The Relationship Between Pupil Diameter Data and Confidence in Multi-.Stage Decisions. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2020: 70-9. [DOI:10.29252/shefa.8.4.70]
18. Van den Berg R, Zylberberg A, Kiani R, Shadlen MN, Wolpert DM. Confidence is the bridge between multi-.stage decisions. Current Biology. 2016; 26(23): 3157-68 [DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2016.10.021]
19. Purcell BA, Kiani R. Hierarchical decision processes that operate over distinct timescales underlie choice and changes in strategy. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences. 2016;113(31):E4531-E40 [DOI:10.1073/pnas.1524685113]
20. Sarafyazd M, Jazayeri M. Hierarchical reasoning by neural circuits in the frontal cortex. Science. 2019 , (6441) 364. [DOI:10.1126/science.aav8911]
21. 21Churchland AK, Kiani R, Shadlen MN. Decision-making with multiple alternatives. Nature neuroscience. 2008, (6) 11: 693-702. [DOI:10.1038/nn.2123]
22. Olianezhad F, Zabbah S, Ebrahimpour R. The influence of past decision information on decision making in .the present. Shefaye Khatam. 2016; 4(3): 1-8 [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.shefa.4.3.1]
23. Shadlen MN, Kiani R. Decision making as a window on cognition. Neuron. 2013; 80(3): 791-806. [DOI:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.047]
24. Tohidi-Moghaddam M, Zabbah S, Ebrahimpour R. The role of the primary information on importance of the last information in decision making. Neurosci J Shefaye Khatam. 2016; 4: 26-34 [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.shefa.4.4.26]
25. Van Den Berg R, Anandalingam K, Zylberberg A, Kiani R, Shadlen MN, Wolpert DM. A common mechanism .underlies changes of mind about decisions and confidence. Elife. 2016;5: e12192 [DOI:10.7554/eLife.12192]
26. Kiani R, Hanks TD, Shadlen MN. Bounded integration in parietal cortex underlies decisions even when viewing duration is dictated by the environment. Journal of Neuroscience. 2008;28(12): 3017-29.. [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4761-07.2008]
27. 27Piet A, Hady AE, Brody CD. Rats optimally accumulate and discount evidence in a dynamic environment. arXiv preprint arXiv: 2017, 171005945. [DOI:10.1101/204248]
28. Wimmer K, Compte A, Roxin A, Peixoto D, Renart A, De La Rocha J. Sensory integration dynamics in a .hierarchical network explains choice probabilities in cortical area MT. Nature communications. 2015;6(1):1-13 [DOI:10.1038/ncomms7177]
29. Zhan J, Ince RA, Van Rijsbergen N, Schyns PG. Dynamic construction of reduced representations in the brain .for perceptual decision behavior. Current Biology. 2019; 29(2): 319-26 [DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2018.11.049]
30. Okazawa G, Sha L, Purcell BA, Kiani R. Psychophysical reverse correlation reflects both sensory and decision-making processes. Nature communications. 2018;9(1): 1-16. [DOI:10.1038/s41467-018-05797-y]
31. Roitman JD, Shadlen MN. Response of neurons in the lateral intraparietal area during a combined visual discrimination reaction time task. Journal of neuroscience. 2002; 22(21): 9475-89. [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-21-09475.2002]
32. Kiani R, Shadlen MN. Representation of confidence associated with a decision by neurons in the parietal .cortex. science. 2009; 324(5928): 759-64 [DOI:10.1126/science.1169405]
33. Hayden BY, Pearson JM, Platt ML. Neuronal basis of sequential foraging decisions in a patchy environment .Nature neuroscience. 2011;14(7):933-9 [DOI:10.1038/nn.2856]
34. Seo H, Cai X, Donahue CH, Lee D. Neural correlates of strategic reasoning during competitive games. Science 2014; 346(6207): 340-3. [DOI:10.1126/science.1256254]
35. Ossmy O, Moran R, Pfeffer T, Tsetsos K, Usher M, Donner TH. The timescale of perceptual evidence .integration can be adapted to the environment. Current Biology. 2013; 23(11): 981-6 [DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.039]
36. Purcell BA, Heitz RP, Cohen JY, Schall JD, Logan GD, Palmeri TJ. Neurally constrained modeling of .perceptual decision making. Psychological review. 2010; 117(4): 1113 [DOI:10.1037/a0020311]
37. Ditterich J. Evidence for time‐variant decision making. European Journal of Neuroscience 2006; 224(12): 3628-41. [DOI:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05221.]

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mousavi Harris A M, Esmaily J, Zabbah S, Ebrahimpour R. There is a Threshold for Decision's Confidence in Hierarchical Perceptual Decision-Making. Shefaye Khatam 2022; 11 (1) :25-36
URL: http://shefayekhatam.ir/article-1-2342-en.html
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 11, Issue 1 (Winter 2022) Back to browse issues page
مجله علوم اعصاب شفای خاتم The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 45 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645