The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bias in the Brain: A Diffusion Model Analysis of Prior Probability and Potential Payoff
Open accessAbstract
In perceptual decision-making, advance knowledge biases people toward choice alternatives that are more likely to be correct and more likely to be profitable. Accumulation-to-bound models provide two possible explanations for these effects: prior knowledge about the relative attractiveness of the alternatives at hand changes either the starting point of the decision process, or the rate of evidence accumulation. Here, we used model-based functional MRI to investigate whether these effects are similar for different types of prior knowledge, and whether there is a common neural substrate underlying bias in simple perceptual choices. We used two versions of the random-dot motion paradigm in which we manipulated bias by: (1) changing the prior likelihood of occurrence for two alternatives (“prior probability”) and (2) assigning a larger reward to one of two alternatives (“potential payoff”). Human subjects performed the task inside and outside a 3T MRI scanner. For each manipulation, bias was quantified by fitting the drift diffusion model to the behavioral data. Individual measurements of bias were then used in the imaging analyses to identify regions involved in biasing choice behavior. Behavioral results showed that subjects tended to make more and faster choices toward the alternative that was most probable or had the largest payoff. This effect was primarily due to a change in the starting point of the accumulation process. Imaging results showed that, at cue level, regions of the frontoparietal network are involved in changing the starting points in both manipulations, suggesting a common mechanism underlying the biasing effects of prior knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory
Oldfield, R. C. (1971) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4 · Cited by 35,900
Jenkinson, M., Bannister, P., Brady, M., & Smith, S. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1132 · Cited by 11,888
The Neural Basis of Decision Making
Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038 · Cited by 3,764
The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420 · Cited by 3,059
Self-citationNewsome, W., & Pare, E. (1988) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.08-06-02201.1988 · Cited by 1,615
Ratcliff, R., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2002) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196302 · Cited by 838
Self-citationNeural computation of log likelihood in control of saccadic eye movements
Carpenter, R. H. S., & Williams, M. L. L. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/377059a0 · Cited by 823
A general mechanism for perceptual decision-making in the human brain
Heekeren, H. R., Marrett, S., Bandettini, P. A., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02966 · Cited by 741
The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision
Palmer, J., Huk, A. C., & Shadlen, M. N. (2005) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/5.5.1 · Cited by 691
A Sequential Theory of Psychological Discrimination
Link, S. W., & Heath, R. A. (1975) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291481 · Cited by 492
Cited by
The expected value of control: an integrative theory of anterior cingulate cortex function
Shenhav, A., Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2013) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.07.007 · Cited by 2,321
Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 · Cited by 1,630
Self-citationExpectation in perceptual decision making: neural and computational mechanisms
Summerfield, C., & de Lange, F. P. (2014) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3838 · Cited by 832
Sequential Sampling Models in Cognitive Neuroscience: Advantages, Applications, and Extensions
Forstmann, B. U., Ratcliff, R., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2016) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033645 · Cited by 620
Self-citationDorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control
Shenhav, A., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M. (2016) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.4384 · Cited by 565
Metadata
- Authors
- Mulder, M. J., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ratcliff, R., Boekel, W., & Forstmann, B. U.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2012-02-14
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2335-2343
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W2067894784
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 12.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bias in the Brain: A Diffusion Model Analysis of Prior Probability and Potential Payoff. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.4156-11.2012
- The paper
- Mulder, M. J., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ratcliff, R., Boekel, W., & Forstmann, B. U. (2012). Bias in the Brain: A Diffusion Model Analysis of Prior Probability and Potential Payoff. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4156-11.2012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.