Cited by 378Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Elapsed Decision Time Affects the Weighting of Prior Probability in a Perceptual Decision Task

Open access
Hanks, Timothy D., Mazurek, Mark E., Kiani, Roozbeh, Hopp, Elisabeth, Shadlen, Michael N.·2011·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Decisions are often based on a combination of new evidence with prior knowledge of the probable best choice. Optimal combination requires knowledge about the reliability of evidence, but in many realistic situations, this is unknown. Here we propose and test a novel theory: the brain exploits elapsed time during decision formation to combine sensory evidence with prior probability. Elapsed time is useful because (1) decisions that linger tend to arise from less reliable evidence, and (2) the expected accuracy at a given decision time depends on the reliability of the evidence gathered up to that point. These regularities allow the brain to combine prior information with sensory evidence by weighting the latter in accordance with reliability. To test this theory, we manipulated the prior probability of the rewarded choice while subjects performed a reaction-time discrimination of motion direction using a range of stimulus reliabilities that varied from trial to trial. The theory explains the effect of prior probability on choice and reaction time over a wide range of stimulus strengths. We found that prior probability was incorporated into the decision process as a dynamic bias signal that increases as a function of decision time. This bias signal depends on the speed–accuracy setting of human subjects, and it is reflected in the firing rates of neurons in the lateral intraparietal area (LIP) of rhesus monkeys performing this task.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.5613-10.2011

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Drugowitsch J Moreno-Bote R Pouget A Computing the cost function in decision making Front Syst Neurosci Conference Abstract: Computational and systems neuroscience 2009 2009
  2. Jeffreys H Theory of probability 1961 3d Edition Oxford Clarendon Press
  3. Seidemann E Neural mechanisms mediating conversion of visual signals into perceptual decisions in a direction discrimination task PhD thesis 1998 Stanford, CA Stanford University Neuroscience Program
  4. Wald A Sequential Analysis 1947 New York Wiley

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanks, T. D., Mazurek, M. E., Kiani, R., Hopp, E., & Shadlen, M. N.
Affiliations
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2011-04-27
Volume
31
Issue
17
Pages
6339-6352
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1987728722
Cited by
378
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 21
FWCI
10.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (RR001 66, 5t32gm007108-40, GM07108)
  • National Eye Institute (EY11378, R01EY011378)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM-007108, GM-07108)
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR00166, P51RR000166)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
perceptual decision making, prior probability, reliability of evidence, Bayesian decision theory, motion direction discrimination, reaction time, speed-accuracy trade-off, lateral intraparietal area, rhesus monkeys, neuronal firing rate
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Decision Making, Discrimination, Psychological, Female, Humans, Macaca mulatta, Male, Models, Psychological, Motion Perception, Neurons, Parietal Lobe, Photic Stimulation, Probability, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Regression Analysis, Time Perception, Bias

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