Modeling decision dynamics disentangles working memory, cognitive control and reinforcement learning and reveals
Krishn Bera1, Alexander Fengler1, Megan A Boudewyn2
1Department of Cognitive & Psychological Sciences, Carney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United states of America.
Abstract:
Various neurocognitive processes contribute to reinforcement learning (RL) and decision making, requiring careful task designs and computational modeling to disentangle them. People rely on capacity-limited working memory (WM) to rapidly and flexibly adapt behavior during learning, together with slower incremental RL processes that support robust long-term retention. The RLWM paradigm was developed to isolate these contributions by manipulating WM demands during learning. Empirical and computational advances support the separability of such processes, but only imperfectly, because a given choice can often equally be attributed to use of WM vs. RL. Here, we show that jointly modeling decision dynamics - accounting not only for choices but also response time distributions, together with hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation - improves the ability to disentangle separable learning and cognitive control processes. Despite added complexity, models with decision dynamics improved parameter recovery and yielded accurate out-of-sample prediction for choices in a held-out test phase after learning. In contrast, models fit only to choices produced an inflation of RL learning rates and failed the out-of-sample test. Moreover, joint modeling also revealed a novel neurocognitive process by which participants proactively widen decision boundaries to increase response caution under increased WM load. Applying our model to patients with schizophrenia revealed a deficit in proactive control mechanisms as well as slowed incremental RL, which were masked by previous choice-only models, while replicating previously established WM deficits. In summary, we show how joint modeling enables accurate, model-based and mechanism-oriented computational phenotyping of psychopathologies.
More Related Videos
07:05Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
Published on: September 10, 2018
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Modeling in Therapy
Participant Modeling
Participant modeling involves therapists demonstrating calm and effective behaviors in situations...
Steps in the Modeling Process
Attention is the first necessary component for observational learning. It involves focusing on what the model is doing and saying. For example, if you decide to take a drawing class to enhance your skills, you need to pay close attention to the instructor's words and hand movements. The characteristics of the model significantly...
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Role of Cerebellum and Prefrontal Cortex in Memory
Causes of Social Behavior II: Cognitive Processes
