A new framework for modeling decisions about changing information: The Piecewise Linear Ballistic Accumulator model

In the real world, decision making processes must be able to integrate non-stationary information that changes systematically while the decision is in progress. Although theories of decision making have traditionally been applied to paradigms with stationary information, non-stationary stimuli are now of increasing theoretical interest. We use a random-dot motion paradigm along with cognitive modeling to investigate how the decision process is updated when a stimulus changes. Participants viewed a cloud of moving dots, where the motion switched directions midway through some trials, and were asked to determine the direction of motion. Behavioral results revealed a strong delay effect: after presentation of the initial motion direction there is a substantial time delay before the changed motion information is integrated into the decision process. To further investigate the underlying changes in the decision process, we developed a Piecewise Linear Ballistic Accumulator model (PLBA). The PLBA is efficient to simulate, enabling it to be fit to participant choice and response-time distribution data in a hierarchal modeling framework using a non-parametric approximate Bayesian algorithm. Consistent with behavioral results, PLBA fits confirmed the presence of a long delay between presentation and integration of new stimulus information, but did not support increased response caution in reaction to the change. We also found the decision process was not veridical, as symmetric stimulus change had an asymmetric effect on the rate of evidence accumulation. Thus, the perceptual decision process was slow to react to, and underestimated, new contrary motion information.

[1]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  A. Diederich,et al.  Modeling the effects of payoff on response bias in a perceptual discrimination task: Bound-change, drift-rate-change, or two-stage-processing hypothesis , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  R. Heath A tandem random walk model for psychological discrimination. , 1981, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[4]  Bruce Tidor,et al.  Sloppy models, parameter uncertainty, and the role of experimental design. , 2010, Molecular bioSystems.

[5]  A. Rangel,et al.  Visual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice. , 2010, Nature neuroscience.

[6]  Frans A. J. Verstraten,et al.  The motion aftereffect , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Integrating Cognitive Process and Descriptive Models of Attitudes and Preferences , 2014, Cogn. Sci..

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

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

[10]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Neural Activity in Macaque Parietal Cortex Reflects Temporal Integration of Visual Motion Signals during Perceptual Decision Making , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  Craig R. M. McKenzie,et al.  When negative evidence increases confidence: change in belief after hearing two sides of a dispute , 2002 .

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

[13]  Richard Ridderinkhof Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: activation and suppression in conflict tasks , 2002, Psychological research.

[14]  B. Silverman,et al.  Kernel Density Estimation Using the Fast Fourier Transform , 1982 .

[15]  B. Silverman,et al.  Algorithm AS 176: Kernel Density Estimation Using the Fast Fourier Transform , 1982 .

[16]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit , 2002 .

[17]  P. Cisek,et al.  Decisions in Changing Conditions: The Urgency-Gating Model , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  Marius Usher,et al.  Using Time-Varying Evidence to Test Models of Decision Dynamics: Bounded Diffusion vs. the Leaky Competing Accumulator Model , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

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

[20]  Ehtibar N Dzhafarov,et al.  Unfalsifiability and mutual translatability of major modeling schemes for choice reaction time. , 2014, Psychological review.

[21]  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.

[22]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

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

[24]  R Blake,et al.  Another perspective on the visual motion aftereffect. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  A method for efficiently sampling from distributions with correlated dimensions. , 2013, Psychological methods.

[26]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Evaluating methods for approximating stochastic differential equations. , 2006, Journal of mathematical psychology.

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

[28]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  ART 3: Hierarchical search using chemical transmitters in self-organizing pattern recognition architectures , 1990, Neural Networks.

[29]  Adele Diederich,et al.  A further test of sequential-sampling models that account for payoff effects on response bias in perceptual decision tasks , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  V. A. Epanechnikov Non-Parametric Estimation of a Multivariate Probability Density , 1969 .

[31]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  The multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator model of context effects in multialternative choice. , 2014, Psychological review.

[32]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[33]  C. D. Kemp,et al.  Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis , 1987 .

[34]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[35]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Cortico-striatal connections predict control over speed and accuracy in perceptual decision making , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Auditory S-R compatibility: the effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[37]  Cajo J. F. ter Braak,et al.  A Markov Chain Monte Carlo version of the genetic algorithm Differential Evolution: easy Bayesian computing for real parameter spaces , 2006, Stat. Comput..

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

[39]  Kendall E. Atkinson An introduction to numerical analysis , 1978 .

[40]  B. Silverman Density estimation for statistics and data analysis , 1986 .

[41]  A. Diederich,et al.  Conflict and the Stochastic-Dominance Principle of Decision Making , 1999 .

[42]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  The falsifiability of actual decision-making models. , 2014, Psychological review.

[43]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The overconstraint of response time models: Rethinking the scaling problem , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[45]  Marius Usher,et al.  Testing Multi-Alternative Decision Models with Non-Stationary Evidence , 2011, Front. Neurosci..

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

[47]  Max C. Keuken,et al.  Early evidence affects later decisions: Why evidence accumulation is required to explain response time data , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[49]  Begnaud Francis Hildebrand,et al.  Introduction to numerical analysis: 2nd edition , 1987 .

[50]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Similarity and number of alternatives in the random-dot motion paradigm , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[51]  E. Lauber,et al.  Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[52]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  A ballistic model of choice response time. , 2005, Psychological review.

[53]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Practice increases the efficiency of evidence accumulation in perceptual choice. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[55]  Christopher R. Myers,et al.  Universally Sloppy Parameter Sensitivities in Systems Biology Models , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[56]  A. Rangel,et al.  Multialternative drift-diffusion model predicts the relationship between visual fixations and choice in value-based decisions , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[57]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A note on modeling accumulation of information when the rate of accumulation changes over time , 1980 .

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

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

[60]  Mario Pannunzi,et al.  The Influence of Spatiotemporal Structure of Noisy Stimuli in Decision Making , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[61]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Brain and Behavior in Decision-Making , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

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

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

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

[65]  K. R. Ridderinkhof,et al.  Striatum and pre-SMA facilitate decision-making under time pressure , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[66]  Diederich,et al.  Dynamic Stochastic Models for Decision Making under Time Constraints , 1997, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[67]  Bingni W. Brunton,et al.  Rats and Humans Can Optimally Accumulate Evidence for Decision-Making , 2013, Science.

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

[69]  Timothy D. Hanks,et al.  Bounded Integration in Parietal Cortex Underlies Decisions Even When Viewing Duration Is Dictated by the Environment , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[70]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Diffusion models of the flanker task: Discrete versus gradual attentional selection , 2011, Cognitive Psychology.

[71]  M. Steinhauser,et al.  A dual-stage two-phase model of selective attention. , 2010, Psychological review.