4.6 Review Book Chapter

Neurophysiology of Human Perceptual Decision-Making

期刊

ANNUAL REVIEW OF NEUROSCIENCE, VOL 44, 2021
卷 44, 期 -, 页码 495-516

出版社

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-092019-100200

关键词

perceptual decision-making; evidence accumulation; cognitive modeling; EEG; MEG; fMRI

资金

  1. Horizon 2020 European Research Council [63829]
  2. European Research Council [865474]
  3. Science Foundation Ireland [15/CDA/3591]
  4. Wellcome Trust [219572/Z/19/Z]
  5. Wellcome Trust [219572/Z/19/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust
  6. European Research Council (ERC) [865474] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)
  7. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [15/CDA/3591] Funding Source: Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent methodological advances have enabled the study of human brain signals that trace the dynamics of decision formation, revealing key elements of decision-making processes and algorithms in the brain.
The discovery of neural signals that reflect the dynamics of perceptual decision formation has had a considerable impact. Not only do such signals enable detailed investigations of the neural implementation of the decision-making process but they also can expose key elements of the brain's decision algorithms. For a long time, such signals were only accessible through direct animal brain recordings, and progress in human neuroscience was hampered by the limitations of noninvasive recording techniques. However, recent methodological advances are increasingly enabling the study of human brain signals that finely trace the dynamics of the unfolding decision process. In this review, we highlight how human neurophysiological data are now being leveraged to furnish new insights into the multiple processing levels involved in forming decisions, to inform the construction and evaluation of mathematical models that can explain intra- and interindividual differences, and to examine how key ancillary processes interact with core decision circuits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据