时间压力下的优柔寡断源于次优切换行为。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Seth R Sullivan, Rakshith Lokesh, Jan A Calalo, Truc Ngo, John H Buggeln, Adam M Roth, Christopher Peters, Isaac Kurtzer, Michael J Carter, Joshua G A Cashaback
{"title":"时间压力下的优柔寡断源于次优切换行为。","authors":"Seth R Sullivan, Rakshith Lokesh, Jan A Calalo, Truc Ngo, John H Buggeln, Adam M Roth, Christopher Peters, Isaac Kurtzer, Michael J Carter, Joshua G A Cashaback","doi":"10.1152/jn.00563.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Indecisive behaviour can be catastrophic, leading to car crashes or stock market losses. Despite fruitful efforts across several decades to understand decision-making, there has been little research on what leads to indecision. Here we examined how indecisions arise under high-pressure deadlines. In our first experiment participants attempted to select a target by either reacting to a stimulus or guessing, when acting under a high pressure time constraint. We found that participants were suboptimal, displaying a below chance win percentage due to an excessive number of indecisions. Computational modelling suggested that participants were excessively indecisive because they failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing, a phenomenon previously unreported in the literature. In a follow-up experiment we pro- vide direct evidence for a functionally relevant time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing. Collectively, our results indicate that participants failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty associated with switching from reacting to guessing, leading to suboptimal and indecisive behaviour.</p>","PeriodicalId":16563,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indecision under time pressure arises from suboptimal switching behaviour.\",\"authors\":\"Seth R Sullivan, Rakshith Lokesh, Jan A Calalo, Truc Ngo, John H Buggeln, Adam M Roth, Christopher Peters, Isaac Kurtzer, Michael J Carter, Joshua G A Cashaback\",\"doi\":\"10.1152/jn.00563.2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Indecisive behaviour can be catastrophic, leading to car crashes or stock market losses. Despite fruitful efforts across several decades to understand decision-making, there has been little research on what leads to indecision. Here we examined how indecisions arise under high-pressure deadlines. In our first experiment participants attempted to select a target by either reacting to a stimulus or guessing, when acting under a high pressure time constraint. We found that participants were suboptimal, displaying a below chance win percentage due to an excessive number of indecisions. Computational modelling suggested that participants were excessively indecisive because they failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing, a phenomenon previously unreported in the literature. In a follow-up experiment we pro- vide direct evidence for a functionally relevant time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing. Collectively, our results indicate that participants failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty associated with switching from reacting to guessing, leading to suboptimal and indecisive behaviour.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00563.2024\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00563.2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

优柔寡断的行为可能是灾难性的,导致车祸或股市损失。尽管几十年来在理解决策方面取得了丰硕的成果,但关于优柔寡断的原因的研究却很少。在这里,我们研究了在高压截止日期下优柔寡断是如何产生的。在我们的第一个实验中,当在高压时间限制下行动时,参与者试图通过对刺激作出反应或猜测来选择目标。我们发现参与者是次优的,由于太多的优柔寡断,他们的胜率低于预期。计算模型表明,参与者过于优柔寡断,因为他们在从反应转向猜测时没有考虑到时间延迟和时间不确定性,这是以前文献中未报道的现象。在后续的实验中,我们提供了当从反应到猜测转换时,与功能相关的时间延迟和时间不确定性的直接证据。总的来说,我们的结果表明,参与者没有考虑到从反应到猜测转换的时间延迟和时间不确定性,导致次优和优柔寡断的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Indecision under time pressure arises from suboptimal switching behaviour.

Indecisive behaviour can be catastrophic, leading to car crashes or stock market losses. Despite fruitful efforts across several decades to understand decision-making, there has been little research on what leads to indecision. Here we examined how indecisions arise under high-pressure deadlines. In our first experiment participants attempted to select a target by either reacting to a stimulus or guessing, when acting under a high pressure time constraint. We found that participants were suboptimal, displaying a below chance win percentage due to an excessive number of indecisions. Computational modelling suggested that participants were excessively indecisive because they failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing, a phenomenon previously unreported in the literature. In a follow-up experiment we pro- vide direct evidence for a functionally relevant time delay and temporal uncertainty when switching from reacting to guessing. Collectively, our results indicate that participants failed to account for a time delay and temporal uncertainty associated with switching from reacting to guessing, leading to suboptimal and indecisive behaviour.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurophysiology
Journal of neurophysiology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.00%
发文量
255
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurophysiology publishes original articles on the function of the nervous system. All levels of function are included, from the membrane and cell to systems and behavior. Experimental approaches include molecular neurobiology, cell culture and slice preparations, membrane physiology, developmental neurobiology, functional neuroanatomy, neurochemistry, neuropharmacology, systems electrophysiology, imaging and mapping techniques, and behavioral analysis. Experimental preparations may be invertebrate or vertebrate species, including humans. Theoretical studies are acceptable if they are tied closely to the interpretation of experimental data and elucidate principles of broad interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信