» Articles » PMID: 27535638

Optimal Policy for Value-based Decision-making

Overview
Journal Nat Commun
Specialty Biology
Date 2016 Aug 19
PMID 27535638
Citations 71
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

For decades now, normative theories of perceptual decisions, and their implementation as drift diffusion models, have driven and significantly improved our understanding of human and animal behaviour and the underlying neural processes. While similar processes seem to govern value-based decisions, we still lack the theoretical understanding of why this ought to be the case. Here, we show that, similar to perceptual decisions, drift diffusion models implement the optimal strategy for value-based decisions. Such optimal decisions require the models' decision boundaries to collapse over time, and to depend on the a priori knowledge about reward contingencies. Diffusion models only implement the optimal strategy under specific task assumptions, and cease to be optimal once we start relaxing these assumptions, by, for example, using non-linear utility functions. Our findings thus provide the much-needed theory for value-based decisions, explain the apparent similarity to perceptual decisions, and predict conditions under which this similarity should break down.

Citing Articles

Mutual inclusivity improves decision-making by smoothing out choice's competitive edge.

Leng X, Fromer R, Summe T, Shenhav A Nat Hum Behav. 2024; .

PMID: 39706869 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-02064-7.


Dissociation between area TE and rhinal cortex in accuracy vs. speed of visual categorization in rhesus monkeys.

Li B, Lowe K, Chandra S, Chen G, Eldridge M, Richmond B Front Behav Neurosci. 2024; 18:1481478.

PMID: 39640511 PMC: 11617191. DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2024.1481478.


Rational inattention in neural coding for economic choice.

Fine J, Moreno-Bote R, Hayden B bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39386501 PMC: 11463532. DOI: 10.1101/2024.09.20.614193.


Common neural choice signals can emerge artefactually amid multiple distinct value signals.

Fromer R, Nassar M, Ehinger B, Shenhav A Nat Hum Behav. 2024; 8(11):2194-2208.

PMID: 39242928 PMC: 11576515. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-01971-z.


The online metacognitive control of decisions.

Benon J, Lee D, Hopper W, Verdeil M, Pessiglione M, Vinckier F Commun Psychol. 2024; 2(1):23.

PMID: 39242926 PMC: 11332065. DOI: 10.1038/s44271-024-00071-y.


References
1.
Brunton B, Botvinick M, Brody C . Rats and humans can optimally accumulate evidence for decision-making. Science. 2013; 340(6128):95-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.1233912. View

2.
Kim J, Shadlen M . Neural correlates of a decision in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the macaque. Nat Neurosci. 1999; 2(2):176-85. DOI: 10.1038/5739. View

3.
Pais D, Hogan P, Schlegel T, Franks N, Leonard N, Marshall J . A mechanism for value-sensitive decision-making. PLoS One. 2013; 8(9):e73216. PMC: 3759446. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073216. View

4.
Kira S, Yang T, Shadlen M . A neural implementation of Wald's sequential probability ratio test. Neuron. 2015; 85(4):861-73. PMC: 4365451. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.01.007. View

5.
Drugowitsch J, Moreno-Bote R, Churchland A, Shadlen M, Pouget A . The cost of accumulating evidence in perceptual decision making. J Neurosci. 2012; 32(11):3612-28. PMC: 3329788. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4010-11.2012. View