Moving forward in perceptual decision making

Sterzer, Philipp

doi:10.1073/pnas.1605619113

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there was no significant association between the decision stage and the prioritization factor ( (1,31) = 2.48, p = 0.13), as determined by ANOVA. Finally, no significant effect of coherency ( (1,31) = 3.96, p =0.06) and prioritization ( (1,31) = 0, p = 0.95) was found by the two-way repeated measure ANOVA on the response duration. Error bars represent standard error of the mean.…”

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Neural Levelmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…Therefore, lower stimulus coherency needed more time to reach the decision boundary, which was characterized by the evidence accumulation process. The two-way repeated measure ANOVA found no significant main effect of coherency ( (1,31) = 0.61, p = 0.44) and spatial prioritization ( (1,31) = 0.9, p = 0.36) on the duration of the encoding stage. The significant effect of the coherency was found by the two-way repeated measure ANOVA on the decision stage duration ( (1,31) = 24.28, p < 0.001).…”

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Neural Levelmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Presentation of the mean of the non-decision time parameter across subjects for each condition. There was no significant main effect of coherency (two-way repeated measure ANOVA, (1,31) = 0.62, p = 0.44) and prioritization factors (two-way repeated measure ANOVA, (1,31) = 4.09, p = 0.052) on this parameter. Error bars represent standard error of the mean.…”

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Behavioral Levelmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Illustration of the mean of the drift rate parameter across subjects for different conditions (HCP, HCNP, LCP, and LCNP). The significant main effect of the coherency factor was reported by two-way repeated measure ANOVA ( (1,31) = 294.65, p < 0.001). Moreover, a marginally significant difference was found by the prioritization factor by two-way repeated measure ANOVA ( (1,31) = 4.09, p = 0.052).…”

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Behavioral Levelmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The response time and response accuracy were analyzed to check the influence of these two factors on decision-making performance. The results of the two-way repeated measure ANOVA revealed the significant main effect of the coherency factor on the response time ( (1,31) = 41.61, p < 0.001) and response accuracy ( (1,31) = 130.23, p < 0.001). Such that, increasing the coherency level of the stimulus provided faster and more accurate responses (Figure 4).…”

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Behavioral Levelmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Brain-behaviour relationships in the perceptual decision-making process through cognitive processing stages

Imani

Harati

Pourreza

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptual decision making, as a process of detecting and categorizing information, has been studied extensively over the last two decades. In this study, we investigated the neural characterization of the whole decision-making process by discovering the information processing stages. Such that, the timing and the neural signature of the processing stages were identified for individual trials. The association of stages duration with the stimulus coherency and spatial prioritization factors also revealed the importance of the evidence accumulation process on the speed of the whole decisionmaking process. We reported that the impact of the stimulus coherency and spatial prioritization on the neural representation of the decision-making process was consistent with the behavioral characterization as well. This study demonstrated that uncovering the cognitive processing stages provided more insights into the decision-making process.Keywords: perceptual decision making, neural and behavioral characterizations, cognitive processing stages a b

show abstract

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Neural Levelmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Decision-making Characterization At the Neural Levelmentioning

confidence: 80%