A Joint Deep Neural Network and Evidence Accumulation Modeling Approach to Human Decision-Making with Naturalistic Images

Evidence accumulation models (EAM) have proven to be an invaluable tool in probing the dynamical properties of decisions over recent decades. However, much of this literature has studied decisions utilizing simple stimuli where the experimenter has perfect knowledge and control over stimulus properties. Here, we develop and test a new method for studying decisions involving naturalistic stimuli (medical images in this case) where the experimenter has neither perfect knowledge nor control of the stimuli properties. The central challenge in studying such decisions is to extract useful representations of images that can be associated with accumulation or drift rates in EAMs. Here, we couple a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) with the diffusion decision model (DDM) to study how expert pathologists and novices make decisions involving the classification of digital images of blood cells as either normal (non-blast) or cancerous (blast). In our approach, the CNN is the basis of a function that translates each image into a drift rate for use in the DDM. Results of fitting the joint CNN-DDM model to choice and response time data demonstrates that (1) both novices and experts demonstrated substantial speed accuracy tradeoffs, (2) both were susceptible to biases introduced by the presentation of pre-stimulus probabilistic cues, and (3) experts were more adept at extracting useful information from images than novices. These results demonstrate that this is a fruitful approach to studying decisions involving complex stimuli that will open new avenues for studying questions not possible with existing methods. Furthermore, this approach is technically feasible and has the potential to be translated into other domains of decision-making research.

[1]  Dumitru Erhan,et al.  Going deeper with convolutions , 2014, 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[2]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  A generalized, likelihood-free method for posterior estimation , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[3]  William R. Holmes,et al.  The impact of speed and bias on the cognitive processes of experts and novices in medical image decision-making , 2017, Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications.

[4]  K. H. Britten,et al.  Responses of neurons in macaque MT to stochastic motion signals , 1993, Visual Neuroscience.

[5]  Jian Sun,et al.  Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[6]  Francis Tuerlinckx,et al.  Fitting the ratcliff diffusion model to experimental data , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  J. Movshon,et al.  The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of neuronal and psychophysical performance , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[9]  M N Shadlen,et al.  Motion perception: seeing and deciding. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  William R. Holmes,et al.  Response-time data provide critical constraints on dynamic models of multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice , 2019, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[11]  Jennifer S Trueblood,et al.  Bayesian analysis of the piecewise diffusion decision model , 2018, Behavior research methods.

[12]  Craig Sanders,et al.  Using Deep-Learning Representations of Complex Natural Stimuli as Input to Psychological Models of Classification , 2018, CogSci.

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

[14]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Revisiting the Evidence for Collapsing Boundaries and Urgency Signals in Perceptual Decision-Making , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

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

[17]  M. Lee,et al.  Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times. , 2011, Psychological methods.

[18]  J. Gold,et al.  Neural computations that underlie decisions about sensory stimuli , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  Thomas J. Palmeri,et al.  Combining Convolutional Neural Networks and Cognitive Models to Predict Novel Object Recognition in Humans , 2018 .

[20]  Thomas V. Wiecki,et al.  HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the Drift-Diffusion Model in Python , 2013, Front. Neuroinform..

[21]  R. Sekuler,et al.  A specific and enduring improvement in visual motion discrimination. , 1982, Science.

[22]  W. Edwards Optimal strategies for seeking information: Models for statistics, choice reaction times, and human information processing ☆ , 1965 .

[23]  Andreas Voss,et al.  A fast numerical algorithm for the estimation of diffusion model parameters , 2008 .

[24]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Visualizing Data using t-SNE , 2008 .

[25]  William R. Holmes,et al.  A practical guide to the Probability Density Approximation (PDA) with improved implementation and error characterization , 2015 .

[26]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Deep Learning , 2015, Nature.

[27]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions , 2004, Trends in Neurosciences.

[28]  Andreas Voss,et al.  Fast-dm: A free program for efficient diffusion model analysis , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[29]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  A new framework for modeling decisions about changing information: The Piecewise Linear Ballistic Accumulator model , 2016, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  D. Navarro,et al.  Fast and accurate calculations for first-passage times in Wiener diffusion models , 2009 .