» Articles » PMID: 24651615

Motor Effort Alters Changes of Mind in Sensorimotor Decision Making

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2014 Mar 22
PMID 24651615
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

Citing Articles

Neural mechanisms of metacognitive improvement under speed pressure.

Stone C, Mattingley J, Rangelov D Commun Biol. 2025; 8(1):223.

PMID: 39939703 PMC: 11821868. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-025-07646-3.


Reaching Distance Influences Perceptual Decisions.

Assarioti E, van Beers R, Smeets J, van Wijk B Eur J Neurosci. 2025; 61(3):e70006.

PMID: 39895244 PMC: 11788607. DOI: 10.1111/ejn.70006.


Spatiotemporal integration of contextual and sensory information within the cortical hierarchy in human pain experience.

Gim S, Hong S, Reynolds Losin E, Woo C PLoS Biol. 2024; 22(11):e3002910.

PMID: 39536050 PMC: 11602096. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002910.


Action-based confidence sharing and collective decision making.

Coucke N, Heinrich M, Dorigo M, Cleeremans A iScience. 2024; 27(10):111006.

PMID: 39429786 PMC: 11490717. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.111006.


Explicit effort may not influence perceptuomotor decision-making.

Manzone J, Welsh T Exp Brain Res. 2023; 241(11-12):2715-2733.

PMID: 37831096 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-023-06710-w.


References
1.
Todorov E, Jordan M . Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination. Nat Neurosci. 2002; 5(11):1226-35. DOI: 10.1038/nn963. View

2.
Howard I, Ingram J, Wolpert D . A modular planar robotic manipulandum with end-point torque control. J Neurosci Methods. 2009; 181(2):199-211. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2009.05.005. View

3.
Mazurek M, Roitman J, Ditterich J, Shadlen M . A role for neural integrators in perceptual decision making. Cereb Cortex. 2003; 13(11):1257-69. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhg097. View

4.
Spivey M, Grosjean M, Knoblich G . Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102(29):10393-8. PMC: 1177386. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0503903102. View

5.
Selen L, Shadlen M, Wolpert D . Deliberation in the motor system: reflex gains track evolving evidence leading to a decision. J Neurosci. 2012; 32(7):2276-86. PMC: 3299561. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5273-11.2012. View