Most organisms facing a choice between multiple stimuli will look repeatedly at them, presumably implementing a comparison process between the items' values. Little is known about the nature of the comparison process in value-based decision-making or about the role of visual fixations in this process. We created a computational model of value-based binary choice in which fixations guide the comparison process and tested it on humans using eye-tracking. We found that the model can quantitatively explain complex relationships between fixation patterns and choices, as well as several fixation-driven decision biases.
Neuroeconomics is the study of the neurobiological and computational basis of value-based decision making. Its goal is to provide a biologically based account of human behaviour that can be applied in both the natural and the social sciences. This Review proposes a framework to investigate different aspects of the neurobiology of decision making. The framework allows us to bring together recent findings in the field, highlight some of the most important outstanding problems, define a common lexicon that bridges the different disciplines that inform neuroeconomics, and point the way to future applications.
Dieter's Dilemma The ability to exercise self-control is central to human success and well-being. However, little is known about the neurobiological underpinnings of self-control and how or why these neural mechanisms might differ between successful and unsuccessful decision-makers. Hare et al. (p. 646 ) used brain imaging in a dieting population undergoing real-life decisions between a healthy or a tempting, yet nutritionally inferior, choice of food. Activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex correlated with the value of the stimulus, termed goal value. Importantly, this activity integrated both health and taste values in individuals who were able to exert self-control in their choices, while reflecting only taste in those unable to exert self-control.
How do we make decisions when confronted with several alternatives (e.g., on a supermarket shelf)? Previous work has shown that accumulator models, such as the drift-diffusion model, can provide accurate descriptions of the psychometric data for binary value-based choices, and that the choice process is guided by visual attention. However, the computational processes used to make choices in more complicated situations involving three or more options are unknown. We propose a model of trinary value-based choice that generalizes what is known about binary choice, and test it using an eye-tracking experiment. We find that the model provides a quantitatively accurate description of the relationship between choice, reaction time, and visual fixation data using the same parameters that were estimated in previous work on binary choice. Our findings suggest that the brain uses similar computational processes to make binary and trinary choices.A basic goal of decision neuroscience is to characterize the computational processes used by individuals to make different types of decisions, as well as the neurobiological substrates of such computations (1-5). A significant amount of effort has been devoted to characterizing these processes in the realm of perceptual decision making involving two-alternative forced choices (2, 6-8). However, many important decisions do not fit this framework: they involve choices among multiple alternatives (n > 2) associated with different reward values (e.g., which food to select from a buffet table). Here we investigate these types of decisions.The standard drift-diffusion model (DDM), as well as closely related versions, such as the leaky competitive accumulator (LCA) model (3, 4, 9), have been highly successful in providing quantitative explanations of the psychometrics, chronometrics, and neurometrics of binary perceptual choice (2, 10-16), and more recently in binary value-based choice (17-20). These models assume that decisions are made by accumulating stochastic information over time until the net evidence in favor of one option exceeds a prespecified threshold. The size of the threshold can be chosen to optimally balance the benefit of accumulating more information with the cost of taking more time to reach a decision (21). Consider, for example, the canonical dot-motion task that has been widely used to study perceptual decision making. Here the stimulus itself is stochastic and each instant is thought to provide noisy but informative evidence for the net direction of movement in the display. Thus, as the individual accumulates more evidence, his knowledge about the true net direction of movement increases (2).The DDM has also been shown to provide highly accurate descriptions of accuracy and response times in domains such as memory retrieval and decision-making, where the stimuli are not explicitly stochastic (17,19,20,(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28); this suggests that these decisions might be made using a similar process of random information accumulation and integration. To see why, ...
An essential component of every economic transaction is a willingness-to-pay (WTP) computation in which buyers calculate the maximum amount of financial resources that they are willing to give up in exchange for the object being sold. Despite its pervasiveness, little is known about how the brain makes this computation. We investigated the neural basis of the WTP computation by scanning hungry subjects' brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging while they placed real bids for the right to eat different foods. We found that activity in the medial orbitofrontal cortex and in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex encodes subjects' WTP for the items. Our results support the hypothesis that the medial orbitofrontal cortex encodes the value of goals in decision making.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.