Sign in
NeuroscienceVision Research
Peer-reviewed journal article

A decision-time account of individual variability in context-dependent orientation estimation

Ron Dekel, Dov SagiiD

Abstract

Following exposure to an oriented stimulus, the perceived orientation is slightly shifted, a phenomenon termed the tilt aftereffect (TAE). This estimation bias, as well as other context-dependent biases, is speculated to reflect statistical mechanisms of inference that optimize visual processing. Importantly, although measured biases are extremely robust in the population, the magnitude of individual bias can be extremely variable. For example, measuring different individuals may result in TAE magnitudes that differ by a factor of 5. Such findings appear to challenge the accounts of bias in terms of learned statistics: is inference so different across individuals? Here, we found that a strong correlation exists between reaction time and TAE, with slower individuals having much less TAE. In the tilt illusion, the spatial analogue of the TAE, we found a similar, though weaker, correlation. These findings can be explained by a theory predicting that bias, caused by a change in the initial conditions of evidence accumulation (e.g., prior), decreases with decision time (Dekel & Sagi, 2019b). We contend that the context-dependence of visual processing is more homogeneous in the population than was previously thought, with the measured variability of perceptual bias explained, at least in part, by the flexibility of decision-making. Homogeneity in processing might reflect the similarity of the learned statistics. HighlightsO_LIThe tilt aftereffect (TAE) exhibits large individual differences. C_LIO_LIReduced TAE magnitudes are found in slower individuals. C_LIO_LIReduced TAE in slower decisions can be explained by the reduced influence of prior. C_LIO_LITherefore, individual variability can reflect decision making flexibility. C_LI

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
3
FWCI
0.40
Field percentile
top 43%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISDekel '20Dekel '20Glasauer '22Gurbuz '23Turner '20Zhang '20
75% semantic matchNeuroscience
Ron Dekel, Dov Sagi·Communications Biology·Feb 10, 2020· 20 citations