IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0195188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A threshold-free model of numerosity comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Santiago Alonso-Diaz
  • Jessica F Cantlon
  • Steven T Piantadosi

Abstract

A dominant mechanism in the Judgment and Decision Making literature states that information is accumulated about each choice option until a decision threshold is met. Only after that threshold does a subject start to execute a motor response to indicate their choice. However, recent research has revealed spatial gradients in motor responses as a function of comparison difficulty as well as changes-of-mind in the middle of an action, both suggesting continued accumulation and processing of decision-related signals after the decision boundary. Here we present a formal model and supporting data from a number comparison task that a continuous motor planner, combined with a simple statistical inference scheme, can model detailed behavioral effects without assuming a threshold. This threshold-free model reproduces subjects’ sensitivity to numerical distance in reaching, accuracy, reaction time, and changes of mind. We argue that the motor system positions the effectors using an optimal biomechanical feedback controller, and continuous statistical inference on outputs from cognitive processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Santiago Alonso-Diaz & Jessica F Cantlon & Steven T Piantadosi, 2018. "A threshold-free model of numerosity comparisons," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0195188
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195188
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0195188&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0195188?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian M Haith & David M Huberdeau & John W Krakauer, 2015. "Hedging Your Bets: Intermediate Movements as Optimal Behavior in the Context of an Incomplete Decision," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Arbora Resulaj & Roozbeh Kiani & Daniel M. Wolpert & Michael N. Shadlen, 2009. "Changes of mind in decision-making," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7261), pages 263-266, September.
    3. Seppe Santens & Sofie Goossens & Tom Verguts, 2011. "Distance in Motion: Response Trajectories Reveal the Dynamics of Number Comparison," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-6, September.
    4. Christopher M. Harris & Daniel M. Wolpert, 1998. "Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 394(6695), pages 780-784, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ryoji Onagawa & Kae Mukai & Kazutoshi Kudo, 2022. "Different planning policies for the initial movement velocity depending on whether the known uncertainty is in the cursor or in the target: Motor planning in situations where two potential movement di," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Shogo Yonekura & Yasuo Kuniyoshi, 2017. "Bodily motion fluctuation improves reaching success rate in a neurophysical agent via geometric-stochastic resonance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Shih-Wei Wu & Maria F Dal Martello & Laurence T Maloney, 2009. "Sub-Optimal Allocation of Time in Sequential Movements," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Max Berniker & Megan K O’Brien & Konrad P Kording & Alaa A Ahmed, 2013. "An Examination of the Generalizability of Motor Costs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, January.
    5. Zohar Z Bronfman & Noam Brezis & Marius Usher, 2016. "Non-monotonic Temporal-Weighting Indicates a Dynamically Modulated Evidence-Integration Mechanism," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.
    6. Manuel Rausch & Michael Zehetleitner, 2019. "The folded X-pattern is not necessarily a statistical signature of decision confidence," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Lionel Rigoux & Emmanuel Guigon, 2012. "A Model of Reward- and Effort-Based Optimal Decision Making and Motor Control," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, October.
    8. Yanhao Ren & Qiang Luo & Wenlian Lu, 2023. "Synchronization Analysis of Linearly Coupled Systems with Signal-Dependent Noises," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    9. Adrian M Haith & David M Huberdeau & John W Krakauer, 2015. "Hedging Your Bets: Intermediate Movements as Optimal Behavior in the Context of an Incomplete Decision," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, March.
    10. Christopher J Hasson & Zhaoran Zhang & Masaki O Abe & Dagmar Sternad, 2016. "Neuromotor Noise Is Malleable by Amplifying Perceived Errors," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-28, August.
    11. Seth W. Egger & Stephen G. Lisberger, 2022. "Neural structure of a sensory decoder for motor control," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Ashesh Vasalya & Gowrishankar Ganesh & Abderrahmane Kheddar, 2018. "More than just co-workers: Presence of humanoid robot co-worker influences human performance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
    13. Andrea Insabato & Mario Pannunzi & Gustavo Deco, 2017. "Multiple Choice Neurodynamical Model of the Uncertain Option Task," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, January.
    14. Josh Merel & Donald M Pianto & John P Cunningham & Liam Paninski, 2015. "Encoder-Decoder Optimization for Brain-Computer Interfaces," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, June.
    15. Maxime Teremetz & Isabelle Amado & Narjes Bendjemaa & Marie-Odile Krebs & Pavel G Lindberg & Marc A Maier, 2014. "Deficient Grip Force Control in Schizophrenia: Behavioral and Modeling Evidence for Altered Motor Inhibition and Motor Noise," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-11, November.
    16. Frederic Danion & Raoul M Bongers & Reinoud J Bootsma, 2014. "The Trade-Off between Spatial and Temporal Variabilities in Reciprocal Upper-Limb Aiming Movements of Different Durations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, May.
    17. Wei Zhang & Sasha Reschechtko & Barry Hahn & Cynthia Benson & Elias Youssef, 2019. "Force-stabilizing synergies can be retained by coordinating sensory-blocked and sensory-intact digits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Julian J Tramper & Bart van den Broek & Wim Wiegerinck & Hilbert J Kappen & Stan Gielen, 2012. "Time-Integrated Position Error Accounts for Sensorimotor Behavior in Time-Constrained Tasks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-10, March.
    19. Konrad P Körding & Izumi Fukunaga & Ian S Howard & James N Ingram & Daniel M Wolpert, 2004. "A Neuroeconomics Approach to Inferring Utility Functions in Sensorimotor Control," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(10), pages 1-1, September.
    20. Pierre Morel & Philipp Ulbrich & Alexander Gail, 2017. "What makes a reach movement effortful? Physical effort discounting supports common minimization principles in decision making and motor control," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0195188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.