scholarly journals Metastable Attractors Explain the Variable Timing of Stable Behavioral Action Sequences

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Recanatesi ◽  
Ulises Pereira ◽  
Masayoshi Murakami ◽  
Zachary Mainen ◽  
Luca Mazzucato
Neuron ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Recanatesi ◽  
Ulises Pereira-Obilinovic ◽  
Masayoshi Murakami ◽  
Zachary Mainen ◽  
Luca Mazzucato

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gautam Reddy ◽  
Laura Desban ◽  
Hidenori Tanaka ◽  
Julian Roussel ◽  
Olivier Mirat ◽  
...  

AbstractAnimals display characteristic behavioral patterns when performing a task, such as the spiraling of a soaring bird or the surge-and-cast of a male moth searching for a female. Identifying such conserved patterns occurring rarely in noisy behavioral data is key to understanding the behavioral response to a distributed stimulus in unrestrained animals. Existing models seek to describe the dynamics of behavior or segment individual locomotor episodes rather than to identify occasional, transient irregularities that make up the behavioral response. To fill this gap, we develop a lexical, hierarchical model of behavior. We designed an unsupervised algorithm called “BASS” to efficiently identify and segment conserved behavioral action sequences transiently occurring in long behavioral recordings. When applied to navigating larval zebrafish, BASS extracts a dictionary of remarkably long, non-Markovian sequences consisting of repeats and mixtures of slow forward and turn bouts. Applied to a novel chemotaxis assay, BASS uncovers conserved chemotactic strategies deployed by zebrafish to avoid aversive cues consisting of sequences of fast large-angle turns and burst swims. In a simulated dataset of soaring gliders climbing thermals, BASS finds the spiralling patterns characteristic of soaring behavior. In both cases, BASS succeeds in identifying action sequences that are highly conserved but transient in the behavior deployed by freely moving animals. BASS can be easily incorporated into the pipelines of existing behavioral analyses across diverse species, and even more broadly used as a generic algorithm for pattern recognition in low-dimensional sequential data.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Simons

The development of Identity Behavior Theory (IBT) has been inspired by identity theory and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the latter of which has been used to assess the relationships between attitudes, self-efficacy, subjective norm, behavioral intention, and behavioral action. TPB has been used to predict many behaviors including, but not limited to, food choices, health behaviors, and, more recently, the behaviors of students and educators, including school counselors. TPB, however, lacks validity, and, despite a call to assess identity as part of the model, no changes have been made to TPB for over two decades. To fill this gap, IBT is proposed as a new model that is concerned with the role that identity plays in the prediction of behavioral enaction, the process whereby individuals shape their experiences through planning and successful actions. Behavioral enaction comprises behavioral intention and behavioral action, and, as part of IBT, is assessed along with identity, attitudes, self-efficacy, and assertiveness. In this paper, the TPB and IBT are reviewed, along with how to develop an identity scale. Recommendations for using IBT in research and applied practice are offered.


Author(s):  
Rachel M. Brown ◽  
Erik Friedgen ◽  
Iring Koch

AbstractActions we perform every day generate perceivable outcomes with both spatial and temporal features. According to the ideomotor principle, we plan our actions by anticipating the outcomes, but this principle does not directly address how sequential movements are influenced by different outcomes. We examined how sequential action planning is influenced by the anticipation of temporal and spatial features of action outcomes. We further explored the influence of action sequence switching. Participants performed cued sequences of button presses that generated visual effects which were either spatially compatible or incompatible with the sequences, and the spatial effects appeared after a short or long delay. The sequence cues switched or repeated across trials, and the predictability of action sequence switches was varied across groups. The results showed a delay-anticipation effect for sequential action, whereby a shorter anticipated delay between action sequences and their outcomes speeded initiation and execution of the cued action sequences. Delay anticipation was increased by predictable action switching, but it was not strongly modified by the spatial compatibility of the action outcomes. The results extend previous demonstrations of delay anticipation to the context of sequential action. The temporal delay between actions and their outcomes appears to be retrieved for sequential planning and influences both the initiation and the execution of actions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erman Misirlisoy ◽  
Patrick Haggard

The capacity to inhibit a planned action gives human behavior its characteristic flexibility. How this mechanism operates and what factors influence a decision to act or not act remain relatively unexplored. We used EEG readiness potentials (RPs) to examine preparatory activity before each action of an ongoing sequence, in which one action was occasionally omitted. We compared RPs between sequences in which omissions were instructed by a rule (e.g., “omit every fourth action”) and sequences in which the participant themselves freely decided which action to omit. RP amplitude was reduced for actions that immediately preceded a voluntary omission but not a rule-based omission. We also used the regular temporal pattern of the action sequences to explore brain processes linked to omitting an action by time-locking EEG averages to the inferred time when an action would have occurred had it not been omitted. When omissions were instructed by a rule, there was a negative-going trend in the EEG, recalling the rising ramp of an RP. No such component was found for voluntary omissions. The results are consistent with a model in which spontaneously fluctuating activity in motor areas of the brain could bias “free” decisions to act or not.


Author(s):  
Sebastian Strauß ◽  
Nikol Rummel

AbstractUnequal participation poses a challenge to collaborative learning because it reduces opportunities for fruitful collaboration among learners and affects learners’ satisfaction. Social group awareness tools can display information on the distribution of participation and thus encourage groups to regulate the distribution of participation. However, some groups might require additional explicit support to leverage the information from such a tool. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of combining a group awareness tool and adaptive collaboration prompts on the distribution of participation during web-based collaboration. In this field experiment, students in a university level online course collaborated twice for two-weeks (16 groups in the first task; 13 groups in the second task) and either received only a group awareness tool, a combination of a group awareness tool and adaptive collaboration prompts, or no additional support. Our results showed that students were more satisfied when the participation in their group was more evenly distributed. However, we only found tentative support that the collaboration support helped groups achieve equal participation. Students reported rarely using the support for shared regulation of participation. Sequence alignment and clustering of action sequences revealed that groups who initiated the collaboration early, coordinated before solving the problem and interacted continuously tended to achieve an equal distribution of participation and were more satisfied with the collaboration. Against the background of our results, we identify potential ways to improve group awareness tools for supporting groups in their regulation of participation, and discuss the premise of equal participation during collaborative learning.


2021 ◽  
Vol 89 (9) ◽  
pp. S121
Author(s):  
Eric Zimmerman ◽  
Zoe LaPalombara ◽  
Susanne Ahmari

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document