Neural signatures of vigilance decrements predict behavioural errors before they occur
- Perception in Action Research Centre, Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Australia
- Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
- Department of Cognitive Science, Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Australia
Figures
Figure 1
The multiple-object monitoring (MOM) task and types of information decoded.
(A) At the start of a block, the relevant colour is cued (here, green; distractors in red). Over the on-task period (~30 min per task condition), multiple dots entered from either direction, each …
Figure 2
Behavioural performance on the MOM task.
The percentage of miss trials (A), and correct reaction times (B), as a function of block. Thick lines show the average across participants (shading 95% confidence intervals) for Active (blue) and …
Figure 3 with 3 supplements
Impact of different conditions and their interactions on information on correct trials (all trials except those in which a target was missed or there was a false alarm).
(A) Decoding of direction of approach information (less task-relevant) and (B) decoding of distance to object information (most task-relevant). Left two columns: Attended dots; Right two columns: …
Figure 3—figure supplement 1
Impact of different conditions in the direction of approach and distance to object information coding and their Bayesian evidence for difference from chance.
Two left graphs: Attended dots; Two right graphs: Unattended (‘distractor’) dots. (A) Decoding of direction of approach information (less task-relevant). (B) Decoding of distance to object …
Figure 3—figure supplement 2
Impact of different conditions and their interactions on information processing on correct trials (all trials except those in which a target was missed or there was a false alarm) without and with standard eye-artefact removal.
Left and right panels show the results without (repeated from Figure 3) and with eye-standard eye-artefact removal, respectively. (A) Decoding of direction of approach information (less …
Figure 3—figure supplement 3
The statistical relationship between the proportion of eye-related measures and Target Frequency, Attention, and Time on the task factors.
(A) Eye-related measures. The error bars show 95% confidence interval around the mean across participants. (B) Bayes factor evidence for the main effects and interactions between factors and …
Figure 4
Relationship between informational connectivity and Attention, Target Frequency, Time on Task, and the behavioural outcome of the trial (i.e., correct vs. miss).
(A) Calculation of connectivity using Spearman’s rank correlation between RDMs obtained from the peri-frontal and peri-occipital sensors as indicated by coloured boxes, respectively. RDMs include …
Figure 5 with 2 supplements
Decoding of information on correct vs miss trials.
(A) Decoding of direction of approach information (less task-relevant). (B) Decoding of distance to object information (most task-relevant). The horizontal dashed lines refer to theoretical …
Figure 5—figure supplement 1
Distribution of decoding accuracies for every individual correct and miss trial in the Active and Monitoring conditions for all 21 subjects.
A and B show the data for correct and miss trials, respectively. The percentages show the percentage of trials for which there was strong (BF >10) evidence for above-chance decoding in Active and …
Figure 5—figure supplement 2
Decoding of information on correct vs false alarm trials.
(A) Decoding of direction of approach information (less task-relevant). (B) Decoding of distance to object information (most task-relevant). The horizontal dashed lines refer to theoretical …
Figure 6 with 1 supplement
Prediction of behavioural outcome (correct vs miss) trial-by-trial using decoding of distance to object information.
(A) Sample classifiers’ accuracies (correct or incorrect classification of current distance as indicated by colours) for a miss (left panel; average accuracy ≅ 43% when the dot reached the …
Figure 6—figure supplement 1
Accuracy of predicting behavioural outcome of trials in the early (first 5) vs late (last 5) blocks of trials before eye-blink removal.
Left column shows the result for the early and right shows the result for the late blocks. (A) Result of classifier accumulation of decoding accuracy. (B) Prediction accuracy and (C) same results …
Author response image 1
The accuracy of predicting behavioral outcome of trials without and with eye artefact removal.
The results are for the left-out participant (averaged over all participants) using the threshold obtained from all the other participants as function of distance/time from the deflection point. …
Tables
Author response table 1
Connectivity (correlation) matrix obtained from four sample areas.
| AREA | A | B | C | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1 |
| B | 0.4 | 1 | 0 | 0.4 |
| C | 0.8 | 0 | 1 | 0.8 |
| D | 1 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1 |
