Response repetition biases in human perceptual decisions are explained by activity decay in competitive attractor models

  1. James J Bonaiuto  Is a corresponding author
  2. Archy O de Berker
  3. Sven Bestmann
  1. University College London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Animals and humans have a tendency to repeat recent choices, a phenomenon known as choice hysteresis. The mechanism for this choice bias remains unclear. Using an established, biophysically informed model of a competitive attractor network for decision making, we found that decaying tail activity from the previous trial caused choice hysteresis, especially during difficult trials, and accurately predicted human perceptual choices. In the model, choice variability could be directionally altered through amplification or dampening of post-trial activity decay through simulated depolarizing or hyperpolarizing network stimulation. An analogous intervention using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) yielded a close match between model predictions and experimental results: net soma depolarizing currents increased choice hysteresis, while hyperpolarizing currents suppressed it. Residual activity in competitive attractor networks within dlPFC may thus give rise to biases in perceptual choices, which can be directionally controlled through non-invasive brain stimulation.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. James J Bonaiuto

    Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, UCL Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    j.bonaiuto@ucl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9165-4082
  2. Archy O de Berker

    Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, UCL Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3460-7172
  3. Sven Bestmann

    Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, UCL Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council (260424)

  • James J Bonaiuto
  • Sven Bestmann

Medical Research Council

  • Archy O de Berker

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: The study was performed in accordance with institutional guidelines for experiments with humans, adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the UCL Research Ethics Committee (reference number 5833/001). Participants gave their informed written consent before participating.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Richard Ivry, University of California, Berkeley, United States

Version history

  1. Received: August 4, 2016
  2. Accepted: December 19, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 22, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 18, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Bonaiuto et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,769
    Page views
  • 375
    Downloads
  • 23
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. James J Bonaiuto
  2. Archy O de Berker
  3. Sven Bestmann
(2016)
Response repetition biases in human perceptual decisions are explained by activity decay in competitive attractor models
eLife 5:e20047.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.20047

Further reading

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Neuroscience
    Alan E Murphy, Nurun Fancy, Nathan Skene
    Research Article

    Mathys et al. conducted the first single-nucleus RNA-seq (snRNA-seq) study of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) (Mathys et al., 2019). With bulk RNA-seq, changes in gene expression across cell types can be lost, potentially masking the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) across different cell types. Through the use of single-cell techniques, the authors benefitted from increased resolution with the potential to uncover cell type-specific DEGs in AD for the first time. However, there were limitations in both their data processing and quality control and their differential expression analysis. Here, we correct these issues and use best-practice approaches to snRNA-seq differential expression, resulting in 549 times fewer DEGs at a false discovery rate of 0.05. Thus, this study highlights the impact of quality control and differential analysis methods on the discovery of disease-associated genes and aims to refocus the AD research field away from spuriously identified genes.

    1. Neuroscience
    Josue Haubrich, Karim Nader
    Research Article

    The strength of a fear memory significantly influences whether it drives adaptive or maladaptive behavior in the future. Yet, how mild and strong fear memories differ in underlying biology is not well understood. We hypothesized that this distinction may not be exclusively the result of changes within specific brain regions, but rather the outcome of collective changes in connectivity across multiple regions within the neural network. To test this, rats were fear conditioned in protocols of varying intensities to generate mild or strong memories. Neuronal activation driven by recall was measured using c-fos immunohistochemistry in 12 brain regions implicated in fear learning and memory. The interregional coordinated brain activity was computed and graph-based functional networks were generated to compare how mild and strong fear memories differ at the systems level. Our results show that mild fear recall is supported by a well-connected brain network with small-world properties in which the amygdala is well-positioned to be modulated by other regions. In contrast, this connectivity is disrupted in strong fear memories and the amygdala is isolated from other regions. These findings indicate that the neural systems underlying mild and strong fear memories differ, with implications for understanding and treating disorders of fear dysregulation.