Neural systems adapt to background levels of stimulation. Adaptive gain control has been extensively studied in sensory systems but overlooked in decision-theoretic models. Here, we describe evidence for adaptive gain control during the serial integration of decision-relevant information. Human observers judged the average information provided by a rapid stream of visual events (samples). The impact that each sample wielded over choices depended on its consistency with the previous sample, with more consistent or expected samples wielding the greatest influence over choice. This bias was also visible in the encoding of decision information in pupillometric signals and in cortical responses measured with functional neuroimaging. These data can be accounted for with a serial sampling model in which the gain of information processing adapts rapidly to reflect the average of the available evidence.

No abstract

An ideal observer will give equivalent weight to sources of information that are equally reliable. However, when averaging visual information, human observers tend to downweight or discount features that are relatively outlying or deviant (‘robust averaging’). Why humans adopt an integration policy that discards important decision information remains unknown. Here, observers were asked to judge the average tilt in a circular array of high-contrast gratings, relative to an orientation boundary defined by a central reference grating. Observers showed robust averaging of orientation, but the extent to which they did so was a positive predictor of their overall performance. Using computational simulations, we show that although robust averaging is suboptimal for a perfect integrator, it paradoxically enhances performance in the presence of “late” noise, i.e. which corrupts decisions during integration. In other words, robust decision strategies increase the brain’s resilience to noise arising in neural computations during decision-making.

SignificanceInformation in the world can sometimes be irrelevant for our decisions. A good decision maker should take into account the relevant information and ignore the distracting information. However, empirical observation showed that human decisions are unduly influenced by distracting information. Diverse theories have been proposed to explain the cost that distracters incur during decision making across perceptual, cognitive, and economics domains. Here, we propose a single, unified model that is based on adaptive gain control to explain the influence of distraction across domains.