Effects of salience and reward information during saccadic decisions under risk
Effects of salience and reward information during saccadic decisions under risk
复制标题
DOI：
10.1364/josaa.26.0000b1
复制
发表时间：
2009-11-01
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Gegenfurtner, Karl R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stritzke, Martin;Trommershaeuser, Julia;Gegenfurtner, Karl R.
以前的工作已经证明，人类选择视觉运动策略，在有风险的快速手部运动中最大化预期收益；例如，参见[Trends Cogn]。SCI。12,291(2008)]；[Glimcher等编，《神经经济学：决策与大脑》(Elsevier，2008)，第95页]。在这里，我们报告了一项类似的研究，在这项研究中，我们记录了一个眼球跳动的决策任务，在这个任务中，金钱奖励和损失与眼球运动的最终位置有关。扫视到彩色编码的目标区域赢得了分数；扫视到部分重叠或毗邻的罚球区可能会导致损失。在实验结束时，实验中获得的点数被兑换成一小笔奖金。我们将参与者的赢利与最优观察者的得分进行了比较，最优观察者的预期收益最大化是基于每个参与者的跳动终点变异性计算的，类似于最近风险P.opt下的最优运动规划模型。SoC。上午好。A 20,1419(2003)1；[空间可视化。16,255(2003)]。我们使用了三种不同的实验范式和三种不同的刺激间间隔(间隙、无间隙和重叠)来操纵眼跳潜伏期，第四个实验(记忆)的延迟时间延长了500ms。我们的结果表明，我们的受试者在扫视时考虑了由不同惩罚指定的奖励信息，并且注视或非常接近目标区域，而不是进入惩罚区域。然而，当奖励或惩罚的大小发生变化时，所选择的策略与最大化预期收益的最优策略显著不同。此外，分数显著受刺激的显著影响。当目标区域被填满，惩罚区域被一条细线勾勒出来时，它们比目标由不那么显著的刺激指示的情况下更高。在潜伏期最短(120-140ms)的试验中，得分尤其低，主要是在Gap范式中获得的。当潜伏期超过160ms时，潜伏期越长，得分越高。这与高达160毫秒的单目标精度的提高是一致的。我们的结果表明，奖赏信息和刺激突显的处理都会影响眼跳的编程，其中刺激突显对眼动的主要贡献是潜伏期更快。(C)2009年美国光学学会
Previous work has demonstrated that humans select visuomotor strategies maximizing expected gain during speeded hand movements under risk; see, e.g., [Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 291 (2008)]; [Glimcher et al., eds., Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain (Elsevier, 2008), p. 95]. Here we report a similar study in which we recorded saccadic eye movements in a saceadic decision task in which monetary rewards and losses were associated with the final position of the eye movement. Saccades into a color-coded target region won points; saccades into a partially overlapping or abutting penalty region could yield a loss. The points won during the experiment were converted into a small monetary bonus at the end of the experiment. We compared participants' winnings to the score of an optimal observer maximizing expected gain that was calculated based on each participant's saccadic endpoint variability, similar to a recent model of optimal movement planning under risk P. Opt. Soc. Am. A 20, 1419 (2003)1; [Spatial Vis. 16, 255 (2003)]. We used three different experimental paradigms with different interstimulus intervals (Gap, No Gap, and Overlap) to manipulate saccadic latencies and a fourth experiment (Memory) with a prolonged 500 ms delay period. Our results show that our subjects took the reward information, as specified by the different penalties, into account when making saccades and fixated onto or very close to the target region and less into the penalty region. However, the selected strategies differed significantly from optimal strategies maximizing expected gain in conditions when the magnitude of reward or penalty was changed. Furthermore, scores were notably affected by stimulus saliency. They were higher when the target region was filled and the penalty region outlined by a thin line, as compared to conditions in which the target was indicated by a less salient stimulus. Scores were particularly poor in trials with the shortest latencies (120-140 ms) mostly obtained in the Gap paradigm. At longer latencies scores improved considerably for latencies longer than 160 ms. This was in line with an improvement in accuracy for single targets up to 160 ms. Our results indicate that processing both of reward information and of stimulus saliency affect the programming of saccades, with a dominating contribution of stimulus saliency for eye movements with faster latencies. (C) 2009 Optical Society of America