Abstract

Motivation improves performance, pushing us beyond our normal limits. One general explanation for this is that the effects of neural noise can be reduced, at a cost. If this were possible, reward would promote investment in resisting noise. But how could the effects of noise be attenuated, and why should this be costly? Negative feedback may be employed to compensate for disturbances in a neural representation. Such feedback would increase the robustness of neural representations to internal signal fluctuations, producing a stable attractor. We propose that encoding this negative feedback in neural signals would incur additional costs proportional to the strength of the feedback signal. We use eye movements to test the hypothesis that motivation by reward improves precision by increasing the strength of internal negative feedback. We find that reward simultaneously increases the amplitude, velocity and endpoint precision of saccades, indicating true improvement in oculomotor performance. Analysis of trajectories demonstrates that variation in the eye position during the course of saccades is predictive of the variation of endpoints, but this relation is reduced by reward. This indicates that motivation permits more aggressive correction of errors during the saccade, so that they no longer affect the endpoint. We suggest that such increases in internal negative feedback allow attractor stability, albeit at a cost, and therefore may explain how motivation improves cognitive as well as motor precision.

Highlights

  • Motivation allows us to be both fast and accurate at the same time, violating the speed-accuracy trade-off

  • We proposed that motivation can improve performance by reducing effects of neural noise, and that noise could be attenuated by investing in negative feedback to stabilise representations, but feedback signals may themselves carry an energetic cost (Fig. 1A–C)

  • First we simulated the effect of corrective negative feedback on variability in a noisy linear dynamic system

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Motivation allows us to be both fast and accurate at the same time, violating the speed-accuracy trade-off. In tasks that require cognitive control, motivation can shorten reaction time but simultaneously reduce errors (Boehler et al, 2012; Chiew and Braver, 2013) Such findings contravene traditional optimal control theory, which predicts that speed should trade off with accuracy, because moving faster requires larger motor control signals (Harris and Wolpert, 1998; Todorov, 2004). Larger signals incur greater noise and are more variable, and have higher energetic costs These costs of moving fast can be offset by the time saved, so that there is an optimal speed of movement (Berret and Jean, 2016; Choi et al, 2014). How could motivation improve accuracy despite faster movement?

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call