Working memory and attention in choice.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
16
11
2022
accepted:
24
03
2023
medline:
13
10
2023
pubmed:
11
10
2023
entrez:
11
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We study the role of attention and working memory in choices where options are presented sequentially rather than simultaneously. We build a model where a costly attention effort is chosen, which can vary over time. Evidence is accumulated proportionally to this effort and the utility of the reward. Crucially, the evidence accumulated decays over time. Optimal attention allocation maximizes expected utility from final choice; the optimal solution takes the decay into account, so attention is preferentially devoted to later times; but convexity of the flow attention cost prevents it from being concentrated near the end. We test this model with a choice experiment where participants observe sequentially two options. In our data the option presented first is, everything else being equal, significantly less likely to be chosen. This recency effect has a natural explanation with appropriate parameter values in our model of leaky evidence accumulation, where the decline is stronger for the option observed first. Analysis of choice, response time and brain imaging data provide support for the model. Working memory plays an essential role. The recency bias is stronger for participants with weaker performance in working memory tasks. Also activity in parietal areas, coding the stored value in working, declines over time as predicted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37819949
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284127
pii: PONE-D-22-31189
pmc: PMC10566694
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0284127Subventions
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : R03 DA029177
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Rustichini et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2014 Sep;9(9):1289-302
pubmed: 23887811
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2004 Dec;4(4):580-99
pubmed: 15849899
Mem Cognit. 2008 Sep;36(6):1087-93
pubmed: 18927027
J Neurophysiol. 2015 Sep;114(3):1382-98
pubmed: 26063776
Neuron. 2015 Oct 7;88(1):33-46
pubmed: 26447571
J Neurosci. 2006 Jan 25;26(4):1314-28
pubmed: 16436619
Neuroimage. 2008 Jun;41(2):286-301
pubmed: 18407525
Nat Commun. 2017 Oct 31;8(1):1208
pubmed: 29084949
Cereb Cortex. 2000 Mar;10(3):206-19
pubmed: 10731217
Nat Neurosci. 2010 Oct;13(10):1292-8
pubmed: 20835253
Nature. 1999 Apr 22;398(6729):704-8
pubmed: 10227292
Nat Neurosci. 2007 Dec;10(12):1625-33
pubmed: 17982449
Neuroimage. 2004 Apr;21(4):1732-47
pubmed: 15050594
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Mar;117(1):34-50
pubmed: 2966230
Neuroimage. 2002 Oct;17(2):825-41
pubmed: 12377157
Trends Cogn Sci. 2010 Apr;14(4):172-9
pubmed: 20171926
Neuroscience. 2006 Apr 28;139(1):23-38
pubmed: 16324795
Science. 2003 Mar 21;299(5614):1898-902
pubmed: 12649484
Neuroimage. 2003 Oct;20(2):1052-63
pubmed: 14568475
Front Neurosci. 2017 Aug 24;11:468
pubmed: 28894413
Nature. 2006 May 11;441(7090):223-6
pubmed: 16633341
Neuroimage. 2009 Mar 1;45(1):143-50
pubmed: 19071223
Theor Popul Biol. 1976 Apr;9(2):129-36
pubmed: 1273796