This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Article
Bolton Chau
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6854-5176
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
There has been debate about whether addition of an irrelevant distractor option to an otherwise binary decision influences which of the two choices is taken. We show that disparate views on this question are reconciled if distractors exert two opposing but not mutually exclusive effects. Each effect predominates in a different part of decision space: 1) a positive distractor effect predicts high-value distractors improve decision-making; 2) a negative distractor effect, of the type associated with divisive normalisation models entails decreased accuracy with increased distractor values. Here, we demonstrate both distractor effects and show disruption of medial intraparietal area (MIP) by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) increases positive distractor effects at the expense of negative distractor effects. Furthermore, individuals with larger MIP volumes are also less susceptible to the disruption induced by TMS. These findings also demonstrate a causal link between MIP and the impact of distractors on decision-making.
Keywords
intraparietal stimulation, decision-making
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
There is NO Competing Interest.
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
The most recent version of this article is available here.
No community comments so far
Version 1
Posted 28 Jan, 2021
No comments provided
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Article
Bolton Chau
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6854-5176
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
The most recent version of this article is available here.
No community comments so far
Version 1
Posted 28 Jan, 2021
No comments provided
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
The most recent version of this article is available here.
There has been debate about whether addition of an irrelevant distractor option to an otherwise binary decision influences which of the two choices is taken. We show that disparate views on this question are reconciled if distractors exert two opposing but not mutually exclusive effects. Each effect predominates in a different part of decision space: 1) a positive distractor effect predicts high-value distractors improve decision-making; 2) a negative distractor effect, of the type associated with divisive normalisation models entails decreased accuracy with increased distractor values. Here, we demonstrate both distractor effects and show disruption of medial intraparietal area (MIP) by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) increases positive distractor effects at the expense of negative distractor effects. Furthermore, individuals with larger MIP volumes are also less susceptible to the disruption induced by TMS. These findings also demonstrate a causal link between MIP and the impact of distractors on decision-making.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
There is NO Competing Interest.
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...