Motor decision-making is often described as a sequential process, beginning with the assessment of available options and leading to the execution of a selected movement. While this view is likely to be accurate for decisions requiring significant deliberation, it would seem unfit for choices between movements in dynamic environments. In this study, we examined whether and how non-selected motor options may be considered post-movement onset. We hypothesized that a change in reward at any point in time implies a dynamic reassessment of options, even after an initial decision has been made. To test this, we performed a decision-making task in which human participants were instructed to execute a reaching movement from an origin to a rectangular target to attain a reward. Reward depended on arrival precision and on the specific distribution of reward presented along the target. On a third of trials, we changed the initial reward distribution post-movement onset. Our results indicated that participants frequently change their initially selected movements when a change is associated with an increase in reward. This process occurs quicker than overall, average reaction times. Finally, changes in movement are not only dependent on reward but also on the current state of the motor apparatus.

Background Past studies do not account for avoidance behaviour in migraine as a potential confounder of phonophobia. Objective To analyse whether phonophobia is partially driven by avoidance behaviour when using the classic methodology (method of limits). Methods This is a case-control study where we tested phonophobia in a cohort of high-frequency/chronic migraine patients (15.5 ± 0.74 headache days/month) and non-headache controls. Auditory stimuli, delivered in both ears, were presented using three different paradigms: the method of limits, the method of constant stimuli, and the adaptive method. Participants were asked to report how bothersome each tone was until a sound aversion threshold was estimated for each method. Results In this study, we successfully replicate previously reported reduction in sound aversion threshold using three different methods in a group of 35 patients and 25 controls (p < 0.0001). Avoidance behaviour in migraine reduced sound aversion threshold in the method of limits (p = 0.0002) and the adaptive method (p < 0.0001) when compared to the method of constant stimuli. While thresholds in controls remained the same across methods (method of limits, p = 0.9877 and adaptive method, p = 1). Conclusion Avoidance behaviour can exacerbate phonophobia. The current methodology to measure phonophobia needs to be revised.