Evidence integration and decision confidence are modulated by stimulus consistency

Evidence-integration is a normative algorithm for choosing between alternatives with noisy evidence, which has been successful in accounting for a vast amount of behavioral and neural data. However, this mechanism has been challenged as tracking integration boundaries sub-serving choice has proven elusive. Here we first show that the decision boundary can be monitored using a novel, model-free behavioral method, termed Decision-Classification Boundary. This method allowed us to both provide direct support for evidence-integration contributions and to identify a novel integration-bias, whereby incoming evidence is modulated based on its consistency with evidence from preceding time-frames. This consistency bias was supported in three cross-domain experiments, involving decisions with perceptual and numerical evidence, which showed that choice-accuracy and decision confidence are modulated by stimulus consistency. Strikingly, despite its seeming sub-optimality, this bias fosters performance by enhancing robustness to integration noise. We argue this bias constitutes a new form of micro-level, within-trial, confirmation bias and discuss implications to broad aspects of decision making.

[1]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior , 1959 .

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

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

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

[5]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[6]  Marius Usher,et al.  The Timescale of Perceptual Evidence Integration Can Be Adapted to the Environment , 2013, Current Biology.

[7]  R. Dolan,et al.  Confidence drives a neural confirmation bias , 2020, Nature Communications.

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

[9]  A. Gorini,et al.  Understanding Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder: Focus on Decision Making , 2006, Neuropsychology Review.

[10]  J. Ditterich.  Evidence for time‐variant decision making , 2006, The European journal of neuroscience.

[11]  Sebastian Gluth,et al.  Value-based attention but not divisive normalization influences decisions with multiple alternatives , 2020, Nature Human Behaviour.

[12]  J. Townsend,et al.  Multialternative Decision Field Theory: A Dynamic Connectionist Model of Decision Making , 2001 .

[13]  G. McLachlan.  Discriminant Analysis and Statistical Pattern Recognition , 1992 .

[14]  Rani Moran,et al.  Optimal decision making in heterogeneous and biased environments , 2014, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[15]  Pietro Perona,et al.  The Attentional Drift Diffusion Model of Simple Perceptual Decision-Making , 2017, Front. Neurosci..

[16]  A. Stocker,et al.  Post-decision biases reveal a self-consistency principle in perceptual inference , 2018, eLife.

[17]  A. Wald.  Foundations of a General Theory of Sequential Decision Functions , 1947 .

[18]  P. Mamassian,et al.  Confidence controls perceptual evidence accumulation , 2020, Nature Communications.

[19]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Sequential effects: Superstition or rational behavior? , 2008, NIPS.

[20]  B. Forstmann,et al.  Perceptual decision neurosciences – A model-based review , 2014, Neuroscience.

[21]  Nick Chater,et al.  Economic irrationality is optimal during noisy decision making , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. , 2006, Psychological review.

[23]  Stephen M. Fleming,et al.  Metacognitive Failure as a Feature of Those Holding Radical Beliefs , 2018, Current Biology.

[24]  Alan A. Stocker,et al.  A Bayesian Model of Conditioned Perception , 2007, NIPS.

[25]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Sequential Sampling Models in Cognitive Neuroscience: Advantages, Applications, and Extensions. , 2016, Annual review of psychology.

[26]  Marius Usher,et al.  The formation of preference in risky choice , 2019, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[27]  J. Movshon,et al.  A new perceptual illusion reveals mechanisms of sensory decoding , 2007, Nature.

[28]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Motivated closing of the mind: "seizing" and "freezing". , 1996, Psychological review.

[29]  R. Bogacz,et al.  Conflict detection in a sequential decision task is associated with increased cortico-subthalamic coherence and prolonged subthalamic oscillatory response in the beta band , 2020, bioRxiv.

[30]  Florent Meyniel,et al.  On-line confidence monitoring during decision making , 2018, Cognition.

[31]  Nick Chater,et al.  Selective Integration: An Attentional Theory of Choice Biases and Adaptive Choice , 2019, Current Directions in Psychological Science.

[32]  Marius Usher,et al.  Disentangling decision models: from independence to competition. , 2013, Psychological review.

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

[34]  Michael N. Shadlen,et al.  Differentiating between integration and non-integration strategies in perceptual decision making , 2020, bioRxiv.

[35]  Marius Usher,et al.  Decisions reduce sensitivity to subsequent information , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[36]  Nick Chater,et al.  Salience driven value integration explains decision biases and preference reversal , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  A. Watson.  Probability summation over time , 1979, Vision Research.

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

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

[40]  M. Usher,et al.  Integration to boundary in decisions between numerical sequences , 2019, Cognition.

[41]  R. Fisher.  THE USE OF MULTIPLE MEASUREMENTS IN TAXONOMIC PROBLEMS , 1936 .

[42]  Anne E. Urai,et al.  Choice History Biases Subsequent Evidence Accumulation , 2018, bioRxiv.

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

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

[45]  Marius Usher,et al.  Attentional Selection Mediates Framing and Risk-Bias Effects , 2018, Psychological science.

[46]  Justin L. Gardner,et al.  Adaptable history biases in human perceptual decisions , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[48]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Selective overweighting of larger magnitudes during noisy numerical comparison , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[49]  Jonathan W. Pillow,et al.  Single-trial spike trains in parietal cortex reveal discrete steps during decision-making , 2015, Science.

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

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

[52]  Samuel W Cheadle,et al.  Adaptive Gain Control during Human Perceptual Choice , 2014, Neuron.

[53]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Selective integration during sequential sampling in posterior neural signals , 2019, bioRxiv.

[54]  Tobias H. Donner,et al.  Adaptive History Biases Result from Confidence-Weighted Accumulation of past Choices , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[55]  Anne E. Urai,et al.  Confirmation Bias through Selective Overweighting of Choice-Consistent Evidence , 2018, Current Biology.

[56]  J. Gold,et al.  Banburismus and the Brain Decoding the Relationship between Sensory Stimuli, Decisions, and Reward , 2002, Neuron.