Decision making in slow and rapid reaching: Sacrificing success to minimize effort
Decision making in slow and rapid reaching: Sacrificing success to minimize effort
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104426
复制
发表时间：
2020-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Hunt, Amelia R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hesse, Constanze;Kangur, Karina;Hunt, Amelia R.
目前视觉决策的研究得出不一致的结论，这些决策的最优性。当在不确定性下执行快速到达运动时，人类倾向于自动选择考虑所有潜在目标的位置的最佳运动路径（空间平均）。相比之下，人类在决定是否同时追求两个行动目标或优先考虑一个目标时很少采用最佳策略。在这里，我们操纵是否空间平均或预先选择一个单一的目标将提供最佳的策略，通过改变两个潜在的运动目标之间的空间分离，以及运动执行的时间。在实验1中，我们的目的是确定所需的时间达到目标之间的小和大的分离，并测量低时间压力下的基线策略。由于时间限制宽松，参与者并没有采用纯粹的平均方法，而是倾向于预先选择最容易到达的目标，并在必要时修正飞行中的运动路径。在实验2中，设定了严格的时间限制，使得达到正确目标的最佳策略取决于潜在目标之间的分离：对于小的分离，有足够的时间采用平均策略，但是对于较大的分离，更高的成功率需要预先选择最终目标。虽然参与者在他们喜欢的策略上有所不同，但没有一个人根据目标的空间间隔灵活地调整他们的运动策略。在实验3中，我们证实了偏向最容易达到的目标，并表明这是以牺牲整体任务成功为代价的。结果表明，人类有一个强烈的倾向，以尽量减少即时运动的努力和一般的失败，以适应运动策略灵活的任务参数的变化。
Current studies on visuomotor decision making come to inconsistent conclusions regarding the optimality with which these decisions are made. When executing rapid reaching movements under uncertainty, humans tend to automatically select optimal movement paths that take into account the position of all potential targets (spatial averaging). In contrast, humans rarely employ optimal strategies when making decisions on whether to pursue two action goals simultaneously or prioritise one goal over another. Here, we manipulated whether spatial averaging or pre-selection of a single target would provide the optimal strategy by varying the spatial separation between two potential movement targets as well as the time available for movement execution. In Experiment 1, we aimed to determine the time needed to reach for targets with small and large separation between them and to measure baseline strategies under low time pressure. Given generous time limits, participants did not employ a pure averaging approach but instead tended to pre-select the target that was easiest to reach and corrected their movement path in-flight if required. In Experiment 2, a strict time limit was set such that the optimal strategy to reach the correct target depended on the separation between the potential targets: for small separations, there was enough time to employ averaging strategies, but higher success for larger separations required pre-selecting the final target instead. While participants varied in the strategies they preferred, none of them flexibly adjusted their movement strategies depending on the spatial separation of the targets. In Experiment 3, we confirm the bias toward targets that are easiest to reach and show that this comes at the expense of overall task success. The results suggest a strong tendency for humans to minimize immediate movement effort and a general failure to adapt movement strategies flexibly with changes in the task parameters.