Pupil Dilation and the Slow Wave ERP Reflect Surprise about Choice Outcome Resulting from Intrinsic Variability in Decision Confidence

Abstract

Central to human and animal cognition is the ability to learn from feedback in order to optimize future rewards. Such a learning signal might be encoded and broadcasted by the brain’s arousal systems, including the noradrenergic locus coeruleus. Pupil responses and the positive slow wave component of event-related potentials reflect rapid changes in the arousal level of the brain. Here, we ask whether and how these variables may reflect surprise: the mismatch between one’s expectation about being correct and the outcome of a decision, when expectations fluctuate due to internal factors (e.g., engagement). We show that during an elementary decision task in the face of uncertainty both physiological markers of phasic arousal reflect surprise. We further show that pupil responses and slow wave event-related potential are unrelated to each other and that prediction error computations depend on feedback awareness. These results further advance our understanding of the role of central arousal systems in decision-making under uncertainty.

All-or-None Evaluation of Prediction Certainty in Autism

“…Inspection of the ERPs revealed an additional response of interest, a positive-going distribution over frontal scalp 650-850 ms post target stimulus that, like the CNV and P3, varied in amplitude with respect to cue validity in the control group. This resembled the Slow Wave (SW) response that that has been highlighted in prediction tasks (de Gee et al, 2021; Loveless et al, 1987; Ruchkin et al, 1980), has a frontal-maximum topography (Loveless et al, 1987), and peaks between 500-800 ms after the event that follows a cue (de Gee et al, 2021; Sambrook et al, 2018). Even though the functional role of this component is debated, the observation that the SW is present during later stages of information processing has been taken to suggest that it may reflect an indepth analyses or re-evaluation process (Karniski et al, 1993), or a need for further processing (Ruchkin et al, 1980).…”

“…4B showing a linear versus curved relationship in controls versus autism groups). This response resembles the SW component, a brain response that is observed in cued tasks (de Gee et al, 2021;Loveless et al, 1987;Ruchkin et al, 1980), typically occurs in this same window after a target or invalid item, also has a positive-going frontal scalp distribution, and varies in amplitude with respect to cue validity. The statistical model revealed a significant effect of condition (ß=-1.44, SE=0.26, p<0.01) and a significant group-by-condition interaction (ß=1.72, SE=0.38, p<0.01), but no main effect of group (ß=-0.86, SE=11.29, p=0.94).…”

“…The P3 was measured as the average amplitude between 250-450 ms (+/-100 ms from the 350 ms peak) at Pz (Polich, 2007). The Slow Wave response (SW) was measured as the average amplitude between 650-850 ms (+/-100 ms from the 750 ms peak) following the target at electrode Fpz (de Gee et al, 2021; Sambrook et al, 2018). While measuring P3 and CNV responses was an apriori decision, the SW was a post-hoc analysis (see the Results and Discussion sections for justification).…”

“…The Slow Wave response (SW) was measured as the average amplitude between 650-850 ms (+/-100 ms from the 750 ms peak) following the target at electrode Fpz (de Gee et al, 2021;Sambrook et al, 2018). While measuring P3 and CNV responses was an apriori decision, the SW was a post-hoc analysis (see the Results and Discussion sections for justification).…”

Auditory accessory stimulus boosts pupil-linked arousal and reduces choice bias

“…First, the accessory stimulus occurred on a random one-sixth of trials and was therefore surprising. Indeed, pupil-linked phasic arousal is reliably elevated after surprising events (de Gee et al, 2021; Filipowicz et al, 2020; Joshi et al, 2016; Kloosterman et al, 2015; Murphy et al, 2014; Preuschoff & Hart, 2011). Second, the auditory white noise (presented at 70 dB) might be intrinsically arousing, irrespective of the inability of subjects to predict when the sound will be presented.…”