IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0136084.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Undesirable Choice Biases with Small Differences in the Spatial Structure of Chance Stimulus Sequences

Author

Listed:
  • David Herrera
  • Mario Treviño

Abstract

In two-alternative discrimination tasks, experimenters usually randomize the location of the rewarded stimulus so that systematic behavior with respect to irrelevant stimuli can only produce chance performance on the learning curves. One way to achieve this is to use random numbers derived from a discrete binomial distribution to create a 'full random training schedule' (FRS). When using FRS, however, sporadic but long laterally-biased training sequences occur by chance and such 'input biases' are thought to promote the generation of laterally-biased choices (i.e., 'output biases'). As an alternative, a 'Gellerman-like training schedule' (GLS) can be used. It removes most input biases by prohibiting the reward from appearing on the same location for more than three consecutive trials. The sequence of past rewards obtained from choosing a particular discriminative stimulus influences the probability of choosing that same stimulus on subsequent trials. Assuming that the long-term average ratio of choices matches the long-term average ratio of reinforcers, we hypothesized that a reduced amount of input biases in GLS compared to FRS should lead to a reduced production of output biases. We compared the choice patterns produced by a 'Rational Decision Maker' (RDM) in response to computer-generated FRS and GLS training sequences. To create a virtual RDM, we implemented an algorithm that generated choices based on past rewards. Our simulations revealed that, although the GLS presented fewer input biases than the FRS, the virtual RDM produced more output biases with GLS than with FRS under a variety of test conditions. Our results reveal that the statistical and temporal properties of training sequences interacted with the RDM to influence the production of output biases. Thus, discrete changes in the training paradigms did not translate linearly into modifications in the pattern of choices generated by a RDM. Virtual RDMs could be further employed to guide the selection of proper training schedules for perceptual decision-making studies.

Suggested Citation

  • David Herrera & Mario Treviño, 2015. "Undesirable Choice Biases with Small Differences in the Spatial Structure of Chance Stimulus Sequences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0136084
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136084
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136084&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0136084?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
    ---><---

    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:pone00:0136084. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.