IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v11y2020i1d10.1038_s41467-020-15630-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A divisive model of evidence accumulation explains uneven weighting of evidence over time

Author

Listed:
  • Waitsang Keung

    (University of Arizona)

  • Todd A. Hagen

    (University of Arizona)

  • Robert C. Wilson

    (University of Arizona
    University of Arizona)

Abstract

Divisive normalization has long been used to account for computations in various neural processes and behaviours. The model proposes that inputs into a neural system are divisively normalized by the system’s total activity. More recently, dynamical versions of divisive normalization have been shown to account for how neural activity evolves over time in value-based decision making. Despite its ubiquity, divisive normalization has not been studied in decisions that require evidence to be integrated over time. Such decisions are important when the information is not all available at once. A key feature of such decisions is how evidence is weighted over time, known as the integration kernel. Here, we provide a formal expression for the integration kernel in divisive normalization, and show that divisive normalization quantitatively accounts for 133 human participants’ perceptual decision making behaviour, performing as well as the state-of-the-art Drift Diffusion Model, the predominant model for perceptual evidence accumulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Waitsang Keung & Todd A. Hagen & Robert C. Wilson, 2020. "A divisive model of evidence accumulation explains uneven weighting of evidence over time," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-15630-0
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15630-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15630-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-020-15630-0?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard D Lange & Ankani Chattoraj & Jeffrey M Beck & Jacob L Yates & Ralf M Haefner, 2021. "A confirmation bias in perceptual decision-making due to hierarchical approximate inference," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-30, November.

    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:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-15630-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.