Abstract
Introduction: Pupil size is a well-known indicator of low-level decision-making processes. However, it is unclear whether these involuntary eye data can represent information about the interwoven processes of hierarchical decision-making. In hierarchical decisions, high-level decision-making depends on the process of making low-level decisions, and the result of these interwoven processes is determined by feedback. Therefore, the exact cause of negative feedback is unclear, as it may be the result of low-level, high-level, or both low- and high-level incorrect decisions. In this study, we investigated the characteristics of eye data (pupil diameter) in the interwoven processes of hierarchical decision-making. Methods: We designed a hierarchical psychophysical experiment in which participants were asked to report their low- and high-level decisions and their confidence simultaneously on one of the colored bars. Participants received correct feedback in a trial when reporting both decisions correctly. During the experiment, the eye data of the participants were recorded by an eye-tracking device. Results: Our findings suggest that pupil size conveys information about high-level decisions as well. Furthermore, this study shows that three parameters (introduced in previous studies), negative feedback in successive trials, stimulus strength (uniformity with confidence), and decision urgency, are all represented in pupil size. Conclusion: The findings support the idea that involuntary eye data are influenced by decision-making-related brain activity in decision-making processes and not just visual stimulus features.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Data Availability
Data will be made available upon reasonable request to the author.
References
Rondeel EW, Van Steenbergen H, Holland RW, Van Knippenberg A. A closer look at cognitive control: differences in resource allocation during updating, inhibition and switching as revealed by pupillometry. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:494.
Alnæs D, Sneve MH, Espeseth T, Endestad T, van de Pavert SHP, Laeng B. Pupil size signals mental effort deployed during multiple object tracking and predicts brain activity in the dorsal attention network and the locus coeruleus. J Vis. 2014;14(4):1–1.
Filipowicz, Glaze, Kable, Gold. Pupil diameter encodes the idiosyncratic, cognitive complexity of belief updating. Elife. 2020;9:e57872.
Maier S, Grueschow M. Pupil dilation predicts individual success in emotion regulation and dietary self-control, BioRxiv, p. 2020.11. 19.376202, 2020.
Van Slooten JC, Jahfari S, Knapen T, Theeuwes J. How pupil responses track value-based decision-making during and after reinforcement learning. PLoS Comput Biol. 2018;14(11):e1006632.
de Gee JW, Knapen T, Donner TH. Decision-related pupil dilation reflects upcoming choice and individual bias, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, no. 5, pp. E618-E625, 2014.
Urai AE, Braun A, Donner TH. Pupil-linked arousal is driven by decision uncertainty and alters serial choice bias. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):14637.
Lempert KM, Chen YL, Fleming SM. Relating pupil dilation and metacognitive confidence during auditory decision-making. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(5):e0126588.
Shooshtari SV, Sadrabadi JE, Azizi Z, Ebrahimpour R. Confidence representation of perceptual decision by eeg and eye data in a random dot motion task. Neuroscience. 2019;406:510–27.
Murphy PR, Vandekerckhove J, Nieuwenhuis S. Pupil-linked arousal determines variability in perceptual decision making. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014;10(9):e1003854.
Zylberberg A, Lorteije A, Ouellette G, De Zeeuw I, Sigman, Roelfsema. Serial, parallel and hierarchical decision making in primates. Elife. 2017;6:e17331.
Prezenski S, Brechmann A, Wolff S, Russwinkel N. A cognitive modeling approach to strategy formation in dynamic decision making. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1335.
Van Slooten JC, Jahfari S, Knapen T, Theeuwes J. Pupil responses as indicators of value-based decision-making, bioRxiv, p. 302166, 2018.
Cohen Hoffing RA, Lauharatanahirun N, Forster DE, Garcia JO, Vettel JM, Thurman SM. Dissociable mappings of tonic and phasic pupillary features onto cognitive processes involved in mental arithmetic. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(3):e0230517.
Colizoli O, de Gee JW, Urai AE, Donner TH. Task-evoked pupil responses reflect internal belief states. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):13702.
Zénon A. Eye pupil signals information gain, Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 286, no. 1911, p. 20191593, 2019.
Lawlor J, Zagala A, Jamali S, Boubenec Y. Pupillary dynamics reflect the impact of temporal expectation on detection strategy, Iscience, vol. 26, no. 2, 2023.
Reddi B, Carpenter RH. The influence of urgency on decision time. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3(8):827–30.
Hyafil A, Moreno-Bote R. Breaking down hierarchies of decision-making in primates. Elife. 2017;6:e16650.
Lorteije JA, Zylberberg A, Ouellette BG, De Zeeuw CI, Sigman M, Roelfsema PR. The formation of hierarchical decisions in the visual cortex, Neuron, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 1344–1356, 2015.
Purcell BA, Kiani R. Hierarchical decision processes that operate over distinct timescales underlie choice and changes in strategy, Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, vol. 113, no. 31, pp. E4531-E4540, 2016.
Sarafyazd M, Jazayeri M. Hierarchical reasoning by neural circuits in the frontal cortex. Science. 2019;364(6441):eaav8911.
Miletić S. Neural evidence for a role of urgency in the speed-accuracy trade-off in perceptual decision-making. J Neurosci. 2016;36(22):5909–10.
Lam E. The psychophysics of decision making in a two-direction random dot motion target selection task, 2014.
Yaghoubi KC, Kabbara S, Arian S, Kobaissi H, Peters MA, Seitz AR. Comparing random dot motion in MATLAB vs. Inquisit Millisecond. Front Psychol. 2022;13:1035518.
Palmer J, Huk AC, Shadlen MN. The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. J Vis. 2005;5(5):1–1.
Hanks TD, Ditterich J, Shadlen MN. Microstimulation of macaque area LIP affects decision-making in a motion discrimination task. Nat Neurosci. 2006;9(5):682–9.
Zylberberg A, Fetsch, Shadlen. The influence of evidence volatility on choice, reaction time and confidence in a perceptual decision. Elife. 2016;5:e17688.
Quick R Jr. A vector-magnitude model of contrast detection, Kybernetik, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 65–67, 1974.
Roitman JD, Shadlen MN. Response of neurons in the lateral intraparietal area during a combined visual discrimination reaction time task. J Neurosci. 2002;22(21):9475–89.
Braem S, Coenen E, Bombeke K, Van Bochove ME, Notebaert W. Open your eyes for prediction errors. Cogn Affect. 2015;15:374–80. & Behavioral Neuroscience
de Gardelle V, Mamassian P. Weighting mean and variability during confidence judgments. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0120870.
Fröber K, Pittino F, Dreisbach G. How sequential changes in reward expectation modulate cognitive control: Pupillometry as a tool to monitor dynamic changes in reward expectation. Int J Psychophysiol. 2020;148:35–49.
van der Wel P, Van Steenbergen H. Pupil dilation as an index of effort in cognitive control tasks: a review. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018;25:2005–15.
Haro S, Rao HM, Quatieri TF, Smalt CJ. EEG alpha and pupil diameter reflect endogenous auditory attention switching and listening effort. Eur J Neurosci. 2022;55(5):1262–77.
Mathôt S. Pupillometry: psychology, physiology, and function. J Cognition, vol. 1, no. 1, 2018.
Franzen L, Cabugao A, Grohmann B, Elalouf K, Johnson AP. Individual pupil size changes as a robust indicator of cognitive familiarity differences. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(1):e0262753.
Warda S, Simola J, Terhune DB. Pupillometry tracks errors in interval timing. Behav Neurosci. 2022;136(5):495.
Acknowledgements
This work has partially been supported by the Cognitive Sciences and Technologies Council under contract number 9114., the Institute for Science and Research Branch of Islamic Azad University, and Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University. We are thankful to Jamal Esmaily Sadrabadi for his helpful discussions.
Funding
This study received financial support from the Cognitive Sciences and Technologies Council under contract number 9114., the Institute for Science and Research Branch of Islamic Azad University, and Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the ethical committee of ETH Zurich (EK 2016-N-73) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic Supplementary Material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yahyaie, L., Ebrahimpour, R. & Koochari, A. Pupil Size Variations Reveal Information About Hierarchical Decision-Making Processes. Cogn Comput 16, 1049–1060 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-024-10246-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-024-10246-8