Psychophysical Laws and the Superorganism

Through theoretical analysis, we show how a superorganism may react to stimulus variations according to psychophysical laws observed in humans and other animals. We investigate an empirically-motivated honeybee house-hunting model, which describes a value-sensitive decision process over potential nest-sites, at the level of the colony. In this study, we show how colony decision time increases with the number of available nests, in agreement with the Hick-Hyman law of psychophysics, and decreases with mean nest quality, in agreement with Piéron’s law. We also show that colony error rate depends on mean nest quality, and difference in quality, in agreement with Weber’s law. Psychophysical laws, particularly Weber’s law, have been found in diverse species, including unicellular organisms. Our theoretical results predict that superorganisms may also exhibit such behaviour, suggesting that these laws arise from fundamental mechanisms of information processing and decision-making. Finally, we propose a combined psychophysical law which unifies Hick-Hyman’s law and Piéron’s law, traditionally studied independently; this unified law makes predictions that can be empirically tested.

[1]  James A. R. Marshall,et al.  Evidence for the Speed–Value Trade-Off: Human and Monkey Decision Making Is Magnitude Sensitive , 2017, Decision.

[2]  R. Gerlai,et al.  Can angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare) count? Discrimination between different shoal sizes follows Weber’s law , 2010, Animal Cognition.

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

[4]  T. Seeley,et al.  Swarm cognition in honey bees , 2007, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[5]  W. E. Hick Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[6]  M. Manosevitz,et al.  High-Speed Scanning in Human Memory , 2022 .

[7]  M. Dorigo,et al.  A Design Pattern for Decentralised Decision Making , 2015, PloS one.

[8]  S. Pratt,et al.  Ant colonies outperform individuals when a sensory discrimination task is difficult but not when it is easy , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  A. Jensen,et al.  Chronometric analysis of intelligence , 1980 .

[10]  H. Piéron,et al.  II. Recherches sur les lois de variation des temps de latence sensorielle en fonction des intensités excitatrices , 1913 .

[11]  G. Fechner,et al.  Elements of psychophysics, 1860. , 1948 .

[12]  Samuel Ellis,et al.  A Simple Threshold Rule Is Sufficient to Explain Sophisticated Collective Decision-Making , 2011, PloS one.

[13]  P. Visscher,et al.  House-hunting by honey bee swarms: collective decisions and individual behaviors , 1999, Insectes Sociaux.

[14]  Thomas Schlegel,et al.  Stop Signals Provide Cross Inhibition in Collective Decision-making , 2022 .

[15]  K. Akre,et al.  Psychophysics and the evolution of behavior. , 2014, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[16]  D. Gillespie Exact Stochastic Simulation of Coupled Chemical Reactions , 1977 .

[17]  N. R. Franks,et al.  Speed–cohesion trade-offs in collective decision making in ants and the concept of precision in animal behaviour , 2013, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  James A. R. Marshall,et al.  Swarm Cognition: an interdisciplinary approach to the study of self-organising biological collectives , 2011, Swarm Intelligence.

[19]  T. Seeley,et al.  Quorum sensing during nest-site selection by honeybee swarms , 2004, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[20]  Marius Usher,et al.  Extending a biologically inspired model of choice: multi-alternatives, nonlinearity and value-based multidimensional choice , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  N. Franks,et al.  Colony-level cognition , 2009, Current Biology.

[22]  Gavin Brown,et al.  Individual Confidence-Weighting and Group Decision-Making. , 2017, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[23]  Julián Vicente-Page,et al.  Dynamic choices are most accurate in small groups , 2017, Theoretical Ecology.

[24]  Tim Kovacs,et al.  On optimal decision-making in brains and social insect colonies , 2009, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[25]  Anna Dornhaus,et al.  Not everything that counts can be counted: ants use multiple metrics for a single nest trait , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  D. Pins,et al.  On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Piéron’s law and choice reaction time , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[27]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[28]  David J. T. Sumpter,et al.  Individual Rules for Trail Pattern Formation in Argentine Ants (Linepithema humile) , 2012, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[29]  Andreagiovanni Reina,et al.  Model of the best-of-N nest-site selection process in honeybees. , 2016, Physical review. E.

[30]  U. Alon,et al.  The incoherent feedforward loop can provide fold-change detection in gene regulation. , 2009, Molecular cell.

[31]  A. Dornhaus,et al.  Decision making by small and large house-hunting ant colonies: one size fits all , 2006, Animal Behaviour.

[32]  T. Seeley,et al.  Nest-site selection in honey bees: how well do swarms implement the "best-of-N" decision rule? , 2001, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[33]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Weber's Law in Decision Making: Integrating Behavioral Data in Humans with a Neurophysiological Model , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  A. Pérez-Escudero,et al.  A common rule for decision making in animal collectives across species , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  James A. R. Marshall,et al.  Collective decision-making , 2017, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[36]  N. Franks,et al.  A Mechanism for Value-Sensitive Decision-Making , 2013, PloS one.

[37]  S. S. Stevens On the psychophysical law. , 1957, Psychological review.

[38]  I. Couzin Collective cognition in animal groups , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  Guy Cowlishaw,et al.  When to use social information: the advantage of large group size in individual decision making , 2007, Biology Letters.

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

[41]  Birte U. Forstmann,et al.  Piéron’s Law and Optimal Behavior in Perceptual Decision-Making , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

[42]  Albert B. Kao,et al.  Decision accuracy in complex environments is often maximized by small group sizes , 2014, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[43]  Dong-Hwan Choe,et al.  Pheromone communication in ants: a detailed analysis of concentration-dependent decisions in three species , 2014, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[44]  Information processing in the Block Design Task. , 1977 .

[45]  G. Fechner Elemente der Psychophysik , 1998 .

[46]  J. Gibbon Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. , 1977 .

[47]  Y. Mori,et al.  Cognition of different length by Physarum polycephalum: Weber's law in an amoeboid organism , 2013 .

[48]  Tom Stafford,et al.  The role of response mechanisms in determining reaction time performance: Piéron’s law revisited , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[49]  S. Pratt,et al.  Groups have a larger cognitive capacity than individuals , 2012, Current Biology.

[50]  Lea Goentoro,et al.  Evidence that fold-change, and not absolute level, of beta-catenin dictates Wnt signaling. , 2009, Molecular cell.

[51]  R. Hyman Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[52]  E. Miller,et al.  Coding of Cognitive Magnitude Compressed Scaling of Numerical Information in the Primate Prefrontal Cortex , 2003, Neuron.

[53]  Leanne Boucher,et al.  Saccades operate in violation of Hick’s law , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.