Speed-accuracy tradeoffs strongly influence the rate of reward that can be earned in many decision-making tasks. Previous reports suggest that human participants often adopt suboptimal speed-accuracy tradeoffs in single session, two-alternative forced-choice tasks. We investigated whether humans acquired optimal speed-accuracy tradeoffs when extensively trained with multiple signal qualities. When performance was characterized in terms of decision time and accuracy, our participants eventually performed nearly optimally in the case of higher signal qualities. Rather than adopting decision criteria that were individually optimal for each signal quality, participants adopted a single threshold that was nearly optimal for most signal qualities. However, setting a single threshold for different coherence conditions resulted in only negligible decrements in the maximum possible reward rate. Finally, we tested two hypotheses regarding the possible sources of suboptimal performance: a) favoring accuracy over reward rate and b) misestimating the reward rate due to timing uncertainty. Our findings provide support for both hypotheses, but also for the hypothesis that participants can learn to approach optimality. We find specifically that an accuracy bias dominates early performance, but diminishes greatly with practice. The residual discrepancy between optimal and observed performance can be explained by an adaptive response to uncertainty in time estimation.

Many couples tend to report steadily decreasing relationship quality following the birth of a child. However, little is known about the postpartum period for Latino couples, a rapidly growing ethnic group who are notably underserved by mental and physical health caregivers in the United States. Thus, this study investigated whether a brief couples' intervention focused on helping couples support each other while increasing healthy behaviors might improve dyadic functioning postpartum. This study presents secondary analyses of data regarding couple functioning from a larger randomized controlled trial with 348 Latino couples to promote smoking cessation. Portions of the intervention taught the couple communication and problem-solving skills to increase healthy behavior. Couples participated in four face-to-face assessments across 1 year starting at the end of the first trimester. Latent growth curve analyses revealed that the treatment group reported an increase in relationship satisfaction and constructive communication after the intervention, which diminished by 1-year follow-up, returning couples to their baseline levels of satisfaction. Results suggest that incorporating a brief couple intervention as part of a larger health intervention for Latinos may prevent postpartum decreases in relationship satisfaction.

Previous research on patients’ expectancies for improvement in clinical trials typically has been conducted after patients have already agreed to participate in a study. Depressed patients (n = 55) read 3 vignettes describing hypothetical clinical trials of antidepressant vs pill placebo, antidepressant vs antidepressant, and psychotherapy vs psychotherapy. Patients reported greater overall acceptability for psychotherapy over antidepressants. Patients had significantly greater expectancies for symptom reduction in either active comparator (medication or psychotherapy) compared with the placebo-controlled design. They also reported greater anticipated improvement and willingness to participate in the psychotherapy trial compared with either medication trial design. Patients’ differential expectancies based on study design could lead to different patient populations being selected for these studies and influence clinical improvement.

No abstract

No abstract