IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0092681.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motor Effort Alters Changes of Mind in Sensorimotor Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Burk
  • James N Ingram
  • David W Franklin
  • Michael N Shadlen
  • Daniel M Wolpert

Abstract

After committing to an action, a decision-maker can change their mind to revise the action. Such changes of mind can even occur when the stream of information that led to the action is curtailed at movement onset. This is explained by the time delays in sensory processing and motor planning which lead to a component at the end of the sensory stream that can only be processed after initiation. Such post-initiation processing can explain the pattern of changes of mind by asserting an accumulation of additional evidence to a criterion level, termed change-of-mind bound. Here we test the hypothesis that physical effort associated with the movement required to change one's mind affects the level of the change-of-mind bound and the time for post-initiation deliberation. We varied the effort required to change from one choice target to another in a reaching movement by varying the geometry of the choice targets or by applying a force field between the targets. We show that there is a reduction in the frequency of change of mind when the separation of the choice targets would require a larger excursion of the hand from the initial to the opposite choice. The reduction is best explained by an increase in the evidence required for changes of mind and a reduced time period of integration after the initial decision. Thus the criteria to revise an initial choice is sensitive to energetic costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Burk & James N Ingram & David W Franklin & Michael N Shadlen & Daniel M Wolpert, 2014. "Motor Effort Alters Changes of Mind in Sensorimotor Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0092681
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092681
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092681&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0092681?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. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nathan F Lepora & Giovanni Pezzulo, 2015. "Embodied Choice: How Action Influences Perceptual Decision Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, April.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:455-469 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Megan K O’Brien & Alaa A Ahmed, 2019. "Asymmetric valuation of gains and losses in effort-based decision making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Arkady Zgonnikov & Nadim A. A. Atiya & Denis O'Hora & Iñaki Rañò & KongFatt Wong-Lin, 2019. "Beyond reach: Do symmetric changes in motor costs affect decision making? A registered report," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(4), pages 455-469, July.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:5:p:527-539 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2021. "Market Instability, Investor Sentiment, And Probability Judgment Error in Index Option Prices," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 71, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    7. J. Tyler Boyd-Meredith & Alex T. Piet & Emily Jane Dennis & Ahmed El Hady & Carlos D. Brody, 2022. "Stable choice coding in rat frontal orienting fields across model-predicted changes of mind," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Marina Martinez-Garcia & Andrea Insabato & Mario Pannunzi & Jose L Pardo-Vazquez & Carlos Acuña & Gustavo Deco, 2015. "The Encoding of Decision Difficulty and Movement Time in the Primate Premotor Cortex," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    9. Nathan F Lepora & Giovanni Pezzulo, 2015. "Embodied Choice: How Action Influences Perceptual Decision Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, April.
    10. Kobe Desender & Luc Vermeylen & Tom Verguts, 2022. "Dynamic influences on static measures of metacognition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Sebastian Bitzer & Jelle Bruineberg & Stefan J Kiebel, 2015. "A Bayesian Attractor Model for Perceptual Decision Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-35, August.
    12. Shariq N Iqbal & Lun Yin & Caroline B Drucker & Qian Kuang & Jean-François Gariépy & Michael L Platt & John M Pearson, 2019. "Latent goal models for dynamic strategic interaction," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Cook, Jeffrey J. & Cruce, Jesse & O'Shaughnessy, Eric & Ardani, Kristen & Margolis, Robert, 2021. "Exploring the link between project delays and cancelation rates in the U.S. rooftop solar industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    14. Stefan Scherbaum & Maja Dshemuchadse & Susanne Leiberg & Thomas Goschke, 2013. "Harder than Expected: Increased Conflict in Clearly Disadvantageous Delayed Choices in a Computer Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-7, November.
    15. Gregory J. Koop, 2013. "An assessment of the temporal dynamics of moral decisions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(5), pages 527-539, September.
    16. Brocas, Isabelle, 2012. "Information processing and decision-making: Evidence from the brain sciences and implications for economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 292-310.
    17. 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.
    18. Lirong Qiu & Jie Su & Yinmei Ni & Yang Bai & Xuesong Zhang & Xiaoli Li & Xiaohong Wan, 2018. "The neural system of metacognition accompanying decision-making in the prefrontal cortex," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-27, April.
    19. Lluís Hernández-Navarro & Ainhoa Hermoso-Mendizabal & Daniel Duque & Jaime de la Rocha & Alexandre Hyafil, 2021. "Proactive and reactive accumulation-to-bound processes compete during perceptual decisions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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:pone00:0092681. 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.