Human decision-makers terminate evidence accumulation using flexible decision rules

Decisions based on evidence accumulated over time require rules governing when to end the accumulation process and commit to a choice. These rules control inherent trade-offs between decision speed and accuracy, which require careful balance to maximize quantities that depend on both like reward rate. We previously showed that, to maximize reward rate, normative decision rules adapt to changing task conditions (Barendregt et al., 2022). Here we used a novel task to examine whether and how people use adaptive rules for individual decisions under a variety of conditions, including changes in decision outcomes across trials and changes in evidence quality both across and within trials. We found that the participants tended to use rules that adjusted, at least partially, to predictable changes in task conditions to improve reward rate, consistent with a rationally bounded implementation of normative principles. These findings help inform our understanding of the extent and limits of flexible decision formation in the brain.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Published
2026-03-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.03.18.712662
Primary Topic
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human decision-makers terminate evidence accumulation using flexible decision rules

Zachary P. Kilpatrick, Joshua I. Gold, Long Ding, Dallstream, Alice, Catherine et al.
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
article

Human decision-makers terminate evidence accumulation using flexible decision rules

Zachary P. Kilpatrick, Joshua I. Gold, Long Ding, Dallstream, Alice, Catherine, Kreimir Josic, Ishan Kalburge
article en

Abstract

Decisions based on evidence accumulated over time require rules governing when to end the accumulation process and commit to a choice. These rules control inherent trade-offs between decision speed and accuracy, which require careful balance to maximize quantities that depend on both like reward rate. We previously showed that, to maximize reward rate, normative decision rules adapt to changing task conditions (Barendregt et al., 2022). Here we used a novel task to examine whether and how people use adaptive rules for individual decisions under a variety of conditions, including changes in decision outcomes across trials and changes in evidence quality both across and within trials. We found that the participants tended to use rules that adjusted, at least partially, to predictable changes in task conditions to improve reward rate, consistent with a rationally bounded implementation of normative principles. These findings help inform our understanding of the extent and limits of flexible decision formation in the brain.

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
University of Colorado Boulder (US), University of Cambridge (GB), University of Colorado System (US), California University of Pennsylvania (US), Bridge University (SS), University of Houston (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.