Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012;7(8):e43351.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043351. Epub 2012 Aug 17.

How we choose one over another: predicting trial-by-trial preference decision

Affiliations

How we choose one over another: predicting trial-by-trial preference decision

Vidya Bhushan et al. PLoS One. 2012.

Abstract

Preference formation is a complex problem as it is subjective, involves emotion, is led by implicit processes, and changes depending on the context even within the same individual. Thus, scientific attempts to predict preference are challenging, yet quite important for basic understanding of human decision making mechanisms, but prediction in a group-average sense has only a limited significance. In this study, we predicted preferential decisions on a trial by trial basis based on brain responses occurring before the individuals made their decisions explicit. Participants made a binary preference decision of approachability based on faces while their electrophysiological responses were recorded. An artificial neural network based pattern-classifier was used with time-frequency resolved patterns of a functional connectivity measure as features for the classifier. We were able to predict preference decisions with a mean accuracy of 74.3 ± 2.79% at participant-independent level and of 91.4 ± 3.8% at participant-dependent level. Further, we revealed a causal role of the first impression on final decision and demonstrated the temporal trajectory of preference decision formation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Classification accuracy at individual and combined level.
(a) Prediction performance of the classifier at individual level (PAM; Pi indicates i-th Participant) and at combined level (CGM). Blue and green bars represent classifier accuracy based on brain responses related to the first face (F1X) and second face (F2X), respectively. Prediction accuracy was higher at individual level than at combined level, and also higher for F2X than F1X. Chance level is at 50% (black horizontal line). (b) Classifier performance for PAM and CGM analysis for both F1X and F2X with respect to time. The classifier performance gradually increased till 700 ms especially for CGM.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Time dependency of average F-ratio distribution at individual and combined level.
(a) Temporal profiles of average F-ratio for data available (from the face onset) till that time for CGM for F1X (in red) and for F2X (in black). (b) Temporal profiles of average F-ratio for successive 50 ms time window for CGM for F1X (in red) and for F2X (in black). (c) Temporal profiles of average F-ratio for data available (from the face onset) till that time for PAM for F1X (in green) and for F2X (in blue). (d) Temporal profiles of average F-ratio for successive 50 ms time window for PAM for F1X (in green) and for F2X (in blue).
Figure 3
Figure 3. Scalp maps of average F-ratio distribution for CGM analysis at different time periods.
(a), (b) Analysis for F1X and F2X, respectively. Note that the frontal electrode region has higher F-ratio in case of F1X while right temporal electrode region has higher F-ratio for F2X.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Leotti LA, Iyengar SS, Ochsner KN (2010) Born to choose: the origins and value of the need for control. Trends Cogn Sci 14: 457–463. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marchisano C, Lim J, Cho HS, Suh DS, Jeon SY, et al. (2003) Consumers report preferences when they should not: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Sensory Studies 18: 487–516.
    1. Chapman KW, Lovelace E, Cardello A, Lawless HT (2010) Preference for one of two identical stimuli: Expectations, explicit instructions and personal traits. Journal of Sensory Studies 25: 35–53.
    1. Hogarth RM (1980) Judgement and choice : the psychology of decision. Chichester [Eng.]; New York: J. Wiley. xi, 250. p. p.
    1. Luu S, Chau T (2009) Decoding subjective preference from single-trial near-infrared spectroscopy signals. J Neural Eng 6: 016003. - PubMed

Publication types