Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Luor, A.

Publications and source records attributed to Luor, A..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Distributional learning drives statistical deafening

Humans and other animals use information about how likely it is for something to happen. The absolute and relative probability of an event influences a remarkable breadth of behaviors, from foraging for food to comprehending linguistic constructions -- even when these probabilities are learned implicitly. It is less clear how, and under what circumstances, statistical learning of simple probabilities might drive changes in perception and cognition. Here, across a series of 29 experiments, we probe listeners sensitivity to task-irrelevant changes in the probability distribution of tones acoustic frequency across tone-in-noise detection and tone duration decisions. We observe that the task-irrelevant frequency distribution influences the ability to detect a sound and the speed with which perceptual decisions about its duration are made. The shape of the probability distribution, its range, and a tones relative position within that range impact observed patterns of suppression and enhancement of tone detection and decision making. Perceptual decisions are also modulated by a newly discovered perceptual bias, with lower frequencies in the distribution more often and more rapidly perceived as longer, and higher frequencies as shorter. Perception is sensitive to rapid distribution changes, but distributional learning from previous probability distributions also carries over. In fact, massed exposure to a single point along the dimension results in seemingly maladaptive loss of sensitivity - occurring entirely in the absence of feedback or reward - along a range of subsequently encountered frequencies. This points to a gain mechanism that suppresses sensitivity to regions along a perceptual dimension that are less likely to be encountered. Significance StatementOrganisms as diverse as honeybees and humans pick up on probabilities in the world around them. People implicitly learn the likelihood of a color, price range, or even syntactic structure. How does statistical learning affect how we detect events and make decisions, especially when probabilities are completely irrelevant to the task at hand, and can change without warning? We find that people learn and track changes in perceptual probabilities irrelevant to a task and that this learning drives dynamic shifts in perception characterized by graded effects of enhancement - and primarily - suppression across acoustic frequency. This can result in a remarkably long- lived diminishment of perceptual sensitivity that seems maladaptive but may instead reflect use of likelihood to guide and sharpen perception.

neuroscience↗

A multi-dataset evaluation of frame censoring for task-based fMRI

Subject motion during fMRI can affect our ability to accurately measure signals of interest. In recent years, frame censoring--that is, statistically excluding motion-contaminated data within the general linear model using nuisance regressors--has appeared in several task-based fMRI studies as a mitigation strategy. However, there have been few systematic investigations quantifying its efficacy. In the present study, we compared the performance of frame censoring to several other common motion correction approaches for task-based fMRI using open data and reproducible workflows. We analyzed eight publicly-available datasets representing eleven distinct tasks in child, adolescent, and adult participants. Performance was quantified using maximum t-values in group analyses, and ROI-based mean activation and split-half reliability in single subjects. We compared frame censoring across several thresholds to the use of 6 and 24 canonical motion regressors, wavelet despiking, robust weighted least squares, and untrained ICA-based denoising, for a total of 240 separate analyses. Thresholds used to identify censored frames were based on both motion estimates (FD) and image intensity changes (DVARS). Relative to standard motion regressors, we found consistent improvements for modest amounts of frame censoring (e.g., 1-2% data loss), although these gains were frequently comparable to what could be achieved using other techniques. Importantly, no single approach consistently outperformed the others across all datasets and tasks. These findings suggest that the choice of a motion mitigation strategy depends on both the dataset and the outcome metric of interest.

neuroscience↗