Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNotaro, Giuseppe
dc.contributor.authorvan Zoest, Wieske
dc.contributor.authorAltman, Magda
dc.contributor.authorMelcher, David
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-26T15:18:26Z
dc.date.available2019-03-26T15:18:26Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.citationGiuseppe Notaro, Wieske van Zoest, Magda Altman, David Melcher, Uri Hasson; Predictions as a window into learning: Anticipatory fixation offsets carry more information about environmental statistics than reactive stimulus-responses. Journal of Vision 2019;19(2):8. doi: 10.1167/19.2.8.es_ES
dc.identifier.issn1534-7362
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/32180
dc.descriptionpublished February 19, 2019es_ES
dc.description.abstractA core question underlying neurobiological and computational models of behavior is how individuals learn environmental statistics and use them to make predictions. Most investigations of this issue have relied on reactive paradigms, in which inferences about predictive processes are derived by modeling responses to stimuli that vary in likelihood. Here we deployed a novel anticipatory oculomotor metric to determine how input statistics impact anticipatory behavior that is decoupled from target-driven-response. We implemented transition constraints between target locations, so that the probability of a target being presented on the same side as the previous trial was 70% in one condition (pret70) and 30% in the other (pret30). Rather than focus on responses to targets, we studied subtle endogenous anticipatory fixation offsets (AFOs) measured while participants fixated the screen center, awaiting a target. These AFOs were small (<0.4° from center on average), but strongly tracked global-level statistics. Speaking to learning dynamics, trial-by-trial fluctuations in AFO were well-described by a learning model, which identified a lower learning rate in pret70 than pret30, corroborating prior suggestions that pret70 is subjectively treated as more regular. Most importantly, direct comparisons with saccade latencies revealed that AFOs: (a) reflected similar temporal integration windows, (b) carried more information about the statistical context than did saccade latencies, and (c) accounted for most of the information that saccade latencies also contained about inputs statistics. Our work demonstrates how strictly predictive processes reflect learning dynamics, and presents a new direction for studying learning and prediction.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipWe thank Leonardo Chelazzi for his comments. UH's work was conducted in part while serving at and with support of the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The study was partially funded by a European Research Council grant to UH (ERC-STG 263318).es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherJournal of Visiones_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/EC/H2020/ERC-STG-263318es_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.subjectstatistical learninges_ES
dc.subjectanticipatory fixation offsetses_ES
dc.subjectpredictiones_ES
dc.subjectinformationes_ES
dc.titlePredictions as a window into learning: Anticipatory fixation offsets carry more information about environmental statistics than reactive stimulus-responseses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2019 The Authors This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://jov.arvojournals.org/es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/19.2.8


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record