A cross-species framework for investigating perceptual evidence accumulation

Abstract

Cross-species studies are important for a comprehensive understanding of brain functions. However, direct quantitative comparison of behaviors across species presents a significant challenge. To enable such comparisons in perceptual decision-making, we developed a synchronized evidence accumulation task for rodents and humans, by aligning mechanics, stimuli, and training. Rats, mice and humans readily learned the task and exhibited qualitatively similar performance. Quantitative model comparison revealed that all three species employed an evidence accumulation strategy, but differed in speed, accuracy, and key decision parameters. Human performance prioritized accuracy, whereas rodent performance was limited by internal time-pressure. Rats optimized reward rate, while mice appeared to switch between evidence accumulation and other strategies trial-to-trial. Together, these results reveal striking similarities and species-specific priorities in decision-making. Furthermore, the synchronized behavioral framework we present may facilitate future studies involving cross-species comparisons, such as evaluating the face validity of animal models of neuropsychiatric disorders.