↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

How We Choose One over Another: Predicting Trial-by-Trial Preference Decision

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
How We Choose One over Another: Predicting Trial-by-Trial Preference Decision
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0043351
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vidya Bhushan, Goutam Saha, Job Lindsen, Shinsuke Shimojo, Joydeep Bhattacharya

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Japan 2 3%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 72 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Student > Master 13 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 41%
Engineering 9 11%
Computer Science 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 17 22%