DECIDING WHEN TO CUT YOUR LOSSESMatt Cieslak, Tobias Kluth, Maren Stiels & Daniel Wood

2

OUTLINE

I. IntroductionII. ModelIII. ExperimentIV. ResultsV. Conclusion

3

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Are people optimal when they decide to cut their losses?

2. Does the GSR influence the optimality?

! !! ??

4

DECISION MAKING MODELSClassic “diffusion” model

Accumulate all evidence: Compare to a constant threshold / accuracy criterion

Urgency Gating model

Accumulate only the novel evidence: Compare to a dropping accuracy criterion

5

URGENCY GATING MODEL

Compute estimate of evidence- summation (≈ integration!) of new information- low-pass filtering (to deal with noise)- “temporal filter model” (Ludwig et al. 2005 J. Neurosci 25:9907-9912)

Multiply by growing function of time and compare to a threshold

6

SETUP

4 ½ feet

GSR2*

13‘‘ at 30 Hz

* GSR2:Device to measure the galvanic skin resonse and sampled at 44.1 kHz

Response by the keyboard with the buttons ⟵ and ⟶7 subjects

7

DESIGN

End of trial by response or Time-out after 5 sec or 8 sec

Time

Duration of a tri

al 5 or

8 sec

• Random uniform distribution was used for the onset of dots• Dots were presented on 60% of the trials

Duration (random): 1-5 sec (Dot-trial) 5 or 8 sec (Time-out-trial)

CONNECTING TO THE URGENCY-GATING MODEL

Time out-35 Points

t=0 t=t t=tend

tend

E(t)tend

E(t)tend

E(t)dots

no dots

dots

no dots

dots

no dots

CONNECTING TO THE URGENCY-GATING MODEL

Correct20 Points

t=0 t=t t=tend

tend

E(t)tend

E(t)tend

E(t)dots

no dots

dots

no dots

dots

no dotsu(t)u(t)

10

tend

E(t)

11

8 sec5 secTrial length

12

RESULTS GSR predicted the latency of their guess on no-dot trials Response-time decreased linearly by a function of time

13

CONCLUSION2 types of subjects:

Just guess: uncertainly not handled well or time feeling very bad

Wait: good estimate of time; optimal behaviour

High GSR does not predict an early response Instead it appears to increase as the person waits Provides evidence for an urgency signal

14

LITERATURE Lecture Slides ‚The blurry borders between decision and doing‘ (Part I, Part II) of Paul

Cisek at the CoSMo Summer School 2011 Cisek, Puskas and El-Murr

Pictures http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Hope_03ca1c_2759561.jpg http://www.oodora.com/life-stories/why-did-the-duck-cross-the-road.html/ducks-

crossing-road/ http://odyniec.net/projects/imgareaselect/duck.jpg http://www.flickr.com/photos/islandboy/3120743762/ http://www.ergo-online.de/uploads/ergo-online-tipps/tft-tief-nah-.jpg http://medpazar.com/content_files/prd_images/GSR2.1.jpg http://

www.beneaththecover.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/AGarcia-010511-monkey-thinker1.jpeg

http://www.kolster. http://www.visualphotos.com/photo/2x2737570/businessman_guessing_cbr001146.jpg

net/quatsch/bilder/computer/windows_wait.jpg

15

HIGHSCORE

Thank you!

# subject

5 sec Version

10 4308 3554 3501 2052 209 -2205 -320

# subjects

8 sec Version

1 50010 2908 402 205 09 -804 -265

16

CLASSIC MODELS

Well-supported by data like - behavioral data (error rates, reaction time distributions) - neural activity

Similar to the sequential probability ratio test (SPRT)- optimal for requiring the fewest samples to reach a given

criterion of accuracy

Widely accepted conclusion: “Diffusion model explains decisions”

17

SUMMARY

Serial model: When Cognition is done, action can begin i.e. “decision threshold”

But what controls growth toward the threshold is an urgency signal i.e. a signal related to motor initiation

When reaching a motor initiation threshold, we commit to our current best guess

Cognition and Action are not so separate

18

URGENCY GATING MODELAddition of a criterion of confidence that drops over time

Results confirm urgency-gating model over integrator models - Cisek, Puskas and El-Murr, 2009

Previous results with constant-evidence tasks compatible with both models- Error rates- Reaction time distributions- Neural activity in LIP, SC, PFC, etc.

Optimization of reward rate, and redundancy between samples

Proposed to be responsible for observed neural activity growth/distributions of RTs