Value Certainty in Drift-Diffusion Models of Preferential Choice 1

The drift-diffusion model (DDM) is widely used and broadly accepted for its ability to account for binary choices (in both the perceptual and preferential domains) and for their response times (RT), as a function of the stimulus or the option values. The DDM is built on an evidence accumulation to bound concept, where, in the value domain, a decision maker repeatedly samples the mental representations of the values of the options until satisfied that there is enough evidence in favor of one option over the other. As the signals that drive the evidence are derived from value estimates that are not known with certainty, repeated sequential samples are necessary to average out noise. The classic DDM does not allow for different options to have different levels of variability in their value representations. However, recent studies have shown that decision makers often report levels of certainty regarding value estimates that vary across choice options. There is therefore a need to extend the DDM to include an option-specific value certainty component. We present several such DDM extensions and validate them against empirical data from four previous studies. The data supports best a DDM version in which the drift of the accumulation is based on a sort of signal-to-noise ratio of value for each option (rather than a mere accumulation of samples from the corresponding value distributions). This DDM variant accounts for the positive impact of value certainty on choice consistency and for the negative impact of value certainty on RT.

[1]  Constant D. Beugré,et al.  The neural basis of decision making , 2018 .

[2]  M. Usher,et al.  Absolutely relative or relatively absolute: violations of value invariance in human decision making , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[3]  Alexandre Pouget,et al.  Optimal policy for value-based decision-making , 2016, Nature Communications.

[4]  Rafal Bogacz,et al.  Bayesian confidence in optimal decisions , 2020 .

[5]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[6]  D. Vickers,et al.  Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination. , 1970, Ergonomics.

[7]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. , 2001, Psychological review.

[8]  Allison G. Reid,et al.  The hippocampus supports deliberation during value-based decisions , 2019, eLife.

[9]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Diffusion Decision Model: Current Issues and History , 2016, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[10]  J. Gold,et al.  The neural basis of decision making. , 2007, Annual review of neuroscience.

[11]  J. Daunizeau,et al.  Automatic integration of confidence in the brain valuation signal , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[12]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[13]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling 2-alternative forced-choice tasks: Accounting for both magnitude and difference effects , 2018, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  J. Daunizeau,et al.  Trading mental effort for confidence in the metacognitive control of value-based decision-making , 2019, bioRxiv.

[15]  Christof Koch,et al.  The Drift Diffusion Model Can Account for the Accuracy and Reaction Time of Value-Based Choices Under High and Low Time Pressure , 2010, Judgment and Decision Making.

[16]  M. Usher,et al.  Visual attention modulates the integration of goal-relevant evidence and not value , 2020, bioRxiv.

[17]  Rachael E. Gwinn,et al.  Attitudes and attention , 2020 .

[18]  Stephanie M. Stalinski,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 2012 .

[19]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Modeling Response Times for Two-Choice Decisions , 1998 .

[20]  Wayne A. Wickelgren,et al.  Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics , 1977 .

[21]  Rafal Bogacz,et al.  Expressions for Bayesian confidence of drift diffusion observers in fluctuating stimuli tasks , 2020, bioRxiv.

[22]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Robust averaging during perceptual judgment , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  M. Usher,et al.  Visual attention modulates the integration of goal-relevant evidence and not value , 2020, eLife.

[24]  Nick Yeung,et al.  Shared Neural Markers of Decision Confidence and Error Detection , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  Adele Diederich,et al.  Survey of decision field theory , 2002, Math. Soc. Sci..

[26]  D. Schacter,et al.  Remembering the past to imagine the future: the prospective brain , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[27]  M. Usher,et al.  Post choice information integration as a causal determinant of confidence: Novel data and a computational account , 2015, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[29]  M. Grueschow,et al.  The precision of value-based choices depends causally on fronto-parietal phase coupling , 2015, Nature Communications.

[30]  Marius Usher,et al.  Evidence integration and decision confidence are modulated by stimulus consistency , 2020, Nature Human Behaviour.

[31]  R. Dolan,et al.  Confidence in value-based choice , 2012, Nature Neuroscience.

[32]  D. Gudbjartsson,et al.  Variants in ELL2 influencing immunoglobulin levels associate with multiple myeloma , 2015, Nature Communications.

[33]  Alexandre Pouget,et al.  Optimal multisensory decision-making in a reaction-time task , 2014, eLife.

[34]  Keqin Liu,et al.  Automatic Integration , 2020, 2006.15210.

[35]  Timothy J. Pleskac,et al.  Two-stage dynamic signal detection: a theory of choice, decision time, and confidence. , 2010, Psychological review.

[36]  Christopher R Fetsch,et al.  Neural correlates of reliability-based cue weighting during multisensory integration , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[37]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. , 2001, Psychological review.

[38]  Ulrike Basten,et al.  How the brain integrates costs and bene fi ts during decision making , 2010 .

[39]  Marios G Philiastides,et al.  Influence of Branding on Preference-Based Decision Making , 2013, Psychological science.

[40]  Ian Krajbich,et al.  Visual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice , 2010, Nature Neuroscience.

[41]  J. Daunizeau,et al.  Choosing what we like vs liking what we choose: How choice-induced preference change might actually be instrumental to decision-making , 2020, PloS one.

[42]  C. Felser,et al.  Negative magnetoresistance without well-defined chirality in the Weyl semimetal TaP , 2015, Nature Communications.

[43]  Lionel Rigoux,et al.  VBA: A Probabilistic Treatment of Nonlinear Models for Neurobiological and Behavioural Data , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[44]  Michael Woodford,et al.  Efficient coding of subjective value , 2018, Nature Neuroscience.

[45]  Carlos Alós-Ferrer,et al.  A Dual-Process Diffusion Model , 2018 .

[46]  J. Daunizeau,et al.  Choosing what we like vs liking what we choose: How choice-induced preference change might actually be instrumental to decision-making , 2019, bioRxiv.

[47]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Representation of Confidence Associated with a Decision by Neurons in the Parietal Cortex , 2009, Science.

[48]  G. Coricelli,et al.  An Empirical Test of the Role of Value Certainty in Decision Making , 2020, Frontiers in Psychology.

[49]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  Cognitive and Neural Bases of Multi-Attribute, Multi-Alternative, Value-based Decisions , 2019, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[50]  M. Gluck,et al.  Interactive memory systems in the human brain , 2001, Nature.

[51]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[52]  D Vickers,et al.  Effects of alternating set for speed or accuracy on response time, accuracy and confidence in a unidimensional discrimination task. , 1982, Acta psychologica.

[53]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks , 2008, Neural Computation.