Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24795559›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2014

Decoupling speed and accuracy in an urgent decision-making task reveals multiple contributions to their trade-off.

Emilio Salinas, Veronica E Scerra, Christopher K Hauser, M Gabriela Costello, Terrence R Stanford

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Contributions of Distinct Attention Mechanisms to Saccadic Choices in a Gamified, Dynamic Environment.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The forced-response method: Urgency rediscovered.Behavior research methods · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Emilio SalinasDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Veronica E ScerraDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Christopher K HauserDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
M Gabriela CostelloDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Terrence R StanfordDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC, USA.

Funding

DIENCEPHALIC MECHANISMS OF VISUOMOTOR INTEGRATIONR01EY012389 · NEI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI STANFORD, TERRENCE R · 1999 to 2009
$2.5M
Midbrain Mechanisms of Sensory-Guided Oculomotor ChoiceR01EY021228 · NEI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SALINAS, EMILIO, STANFORD, TERRENCE R · 2014 to 2017
$1.8M
Training Program in Multisensory ProcessesT32NS073553 · NINDS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI STEIN, BARRY E · 2011 to 2020
$1.7M
CRCNS:Investigating perceptual processing speed and its impact on choice behaviorR01DA030750 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SALINAS, EMILIO, STANFORD, TERRENCE R · 2010 to 2013
$1.2M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY012389NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021228NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA030750NINDS NIH HHS T32 NS073553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A key goal in the study of decision making is determining how neural networks involved in perception and motor planning interact to generate a given choice, but this is complicated due to the internal trade-off between speed and accuracy, which confounds their individual contributions. Urgent decisions, however, are special: they may range between random and fully informed, depending on the amount of processing time (or stimulus viewing time) available in each trial, but regardless, movement preparation always starts early on. As a consequence, under time pressure it is possible to produce a psychophysical curve that characterizes perceptual performance independently of reaction time, and this, in turn, makes it possible to pinpoint how perceptual information (which requires sensory input) modulates motor planning (which does not) to guide a choice. Here we review experiments in which, on the basis of this approach, the origin of the speed-accuracy trade-off becomes particularly transparent. Psychophysical, neurophysiological, and modeling results in the "compelled-saccade" task indicate that, during urgent decision making, perceptual information-if and whenever it becomes available-accelerates or decelerates competing motor plans that are already ongoing. This interaction affects both the reaction time and the probability of success in any given trial. In two experiments with reward asymmetries, we find that speed and accuracy can be traded in different amounts and for different reasons, depending on how the particular task contingencies affect specific neural mechanisms related to perception and motor planning. Therefore, from the vantage point of urgent decisions, the speed-accuracy trade-off is not a unique phenomenon tied to a single underlying mechanism, but rather a typical outcome of many possible combinations of internal adjustments within sensory-motor neural circuits.

Indexed as

choicecomputational modeldecision makingdiscriminationmental chronometryrace to thresholdsaccadesubtraction method

Identifiers

PMID24795559
PMCPMC4005963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.