Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Rational Inattention and Tonic Dopamine

View through CrossRef
AbstractSlow-timescale (tonic) changes in dopamine (DA) contribute to a wide variety of processes in reinforcement learning, interval timing, and other domains. Furthermore, changes in tonic DA exert distinct effects depending on when they occur (e.g., during learning vs. performance) and what task the subject is performing (e.g., operant vs. classical conditioning). Two influential theories of tonic DA—the average reward theory and the Bayesian theory in which DA controls precision—have each been successful at explaining a subset of empirical findings. But how the same DA signal performs two seemingly distinct functions without creating crosstalk is not well understood. Here we reconcile the two theories under the unifying framework of ‘rational inattention,’ which (1) conceptually links average reward and precision, (2) outlines how DA manipulations affect this relationship, and in so doing, (3) captures new empirical phenomena. In brief, rational inattention asserts that agents can increase their precision in a task (and thus improve their performance) by paying a cognitive cost. Crucially, whether this cost is worth paying depends on average reward availability, reported by DA. The monotonic relationship between average reward and precision means that the DA signal contains the information necessary to retrieve the precision. When this information is needed after the task is performed, as presumed by Bayesian inference, acute manipulations of DA will bias behavior in predictable ways. We show how this framework reconciles a remarkably large collection of experimental findings. In reinforcement learning, the rational inattention framework predicts that learning from positive and negative feedback should be enhanced in high and low DA states, respectively, and that DA should tip the exploration-exploitation balance toward exploitation. In interval timing, this framework predicts that DA should increase the speed of the internal clock and decrease the extent of interference by other temporal stimuli during temporal reproduction (the central tendency effect). Finally, rational inattention makes the new predictions that these effects should be critically dependent on the controllability of rewards, that post-reward delays in intertemporal choice tasks should be underestimated, and that average reward manipulations should affect the speed of the clock—thus capturing empirical findings that are unexplained by either theory alone. Our results suggest that a common computational repertoire may underlie the seemingly heterogeneous roles of DA.Author SummaryThe roles of tonic dopamine (DA) have been the subject of much speculation, partly due to the variety of processes it has been implicated in. For instance, tonic DA modulates how we learn new information, but also affects how previously learned information is used. DA affects the speed of our internal timing mechanism, but also modulates the degree to which our temporal estimates are influenced by context. DA improves performance in some tasks, but seems only to affect confidence in others. Are there common principles that govern the role of DA across these domains? In this work, we introduce the concept of ‘rational inattention,’ originally borrowed from economics, to the DA literature. We show how the rational inattention account of DA unites two influential theories that are seemingly at odds: the average reward theory and the Bayesian theory of tonic DA. We then show how this framework reconciles the diverse roles of DA, which cannot be addressed by either theory alone.
Title: Rational Inattention and Tonic Dopamine
Description:
AbstractSlow-timescale (tonic) changes in dopamine (DA) contribute to a wide variety of processes in reinforcement learning, interval timing, and other domains.
Furthermore, changes in tonic DA exert distinct effects depending on when they occur (e.
g.
, during learning vs.
performance) and what task the subject is performing (e.
g.
, operant vs.
classical conditioning).
Two influential theories of tonic DA—the average reward theory and the Bayesian theory in which DA controls precision—have each been successful at explaining a subset of empirical findings.
But how the same DA signal performs two seemingly distinct functions without creating crosstalk is not well understood.
Here we reconcile the two theories under the unifying framework of ‘rational inattention,’ which (1) conceptually links average reward and precision, (2) outlines how DA manipulations affect this relationship, and in so doing, (3) captures new empirical phenomena.
In brief, rational inattention asserts that agents can increase their precision in a task (and thus improve their performance) by paying a cognitive cost.
Crucially, whether this cost is worth paying depends on average reward availability, reported by DA.
The monotonic relationship between average reward and precision means that the DA signal contains the information necessary to retrieve the precision.
When this information is needed after the task is performed, as presumed by Bayesian inference, acute manipulations of DA will bias behavior in predictable ways.
We show how this framework reconciles a remarkably large collection of experimental findings.
In reinforcement learning, the rational inattention framework predicts that learning from positive and negative feedback should be enhanced in high and low DA states, respectively, and that DA should tip the exploration-exploitation balance toward exploitation.
In interval timing, this framework predicts that DA should increase the speed of the internal clock and decrease the extent of interference by other temporal stimuli during temporal reproduction (the central tendency effect).
Finally, rational inattention makes the new predictions that these effects should be critically dependent on the controllability of rewards, that post-reward delays in intertemporal choice tasks should be underestimated, and that average reward manipulations should affect the speed of the clock—thus capturing empirical findings that are unexplained by either theory alone.
Our results suggest that a common computational repertoire may underlie the seemingly heterogeneous roles of DA.
Author SummaryThe roles of tonic dopamine (DA) have been the subject of much speculation, partly due to the variety of processes it has been implicated in.
For instance, tonic DA modulates how we learn new information, but also affects how previously learned information is used.
DA affects the speed of our internal timing mechanism, but also modulates the degree to which our temporal estimates are influenced by context.
DA improves performance in some tasks, but seems only to affect confidence in others.
Are there common principles that govern the role of DA across these domains? In this work, we introduce the concept of ‘rational inattention,’ originally borrowed from economics, to the DA literature.
We show how the rational inattention account of DA unites two influential theories that are seemingly at odds: the average reward theory and the Bayesian theory of tonic DA.
We then show how this framework reconciles the diverse roles of DA, which cannot be addressed by either theory alone.

Related Results

Exploring the in vivo subthreshold membrane activity of phasic firing in midbrain dopamine neurons
Exploring the in vivo subthreshold membrane activity of phasic firing in midbrain dopamine neurons
Dopamine is a key neurotransmitter that serves several essential functions in daily behaviors such as locomotion, motivation, stimulus coding, and learning. Disrupted dopamine circ...
Abstract 1856: Adaptation to dopamine impairs the anti-cancer effect of ONC201 and ONC206
Abstract 1856: Adaptation to dopamine impairs the anti-cancer effect of ONC201 and ONC206
Abstract ONC201 (originally discovered as TRAIL-Inducing Compound #10 or TIC10) and analogue ONC206 have been found to induce an integrated stress response with sugg...
Pharmacokinetics of Dopamine in Healthy Male Subjects
Pharmacokinetics of Dopamine in Healthy Male Subjects
Background Dopamine is an agonist of alpha, beta, and dopaminergic receptors with varying hemodynamic effects depending on the dose of drug being administered. The purp...
Chitosan-Catechol Modified Dopamine Sensor
Chitosan-Catechol Modified Dopamine Sensor
Dopamine is a neurotransmitter found in several deep structures of the brain. For example, in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) of the midbrain, in the substantia nigra pars compact...
Adaptor Protein-3 Produces Synaptic Vesicles that Release Phasic Dopamine
Adaptor Protein-3 Produces Synaptic Vesicles that Release Phasic Dopamine
AbstractThe burst firing of midbrain dopamine neurons releases a phasic dopamine signal that mediates reinforcement learning. At many synapses, however, high firing rates deplete s...
Mengendalikan Dopamine Detox
Mengendalikan Dopamine Detox
The purpose of this research is to find out and learn about "Dopamine Detox" from the "1 Day of Success" youtube channel entitled "Control Yourself From All Addictions". In this st...
The Dopamine Receptors
The Dopamine Receptors
Abstract Dopamine receptors have a prominent place in our understanding of brain function. Drugs blocking dopamine receptors are used as antipsy...
Control of Head Movement in the Locust, Schistocerca Gregaria
Control of Head Movement in the Locust, Schistocerca Gregaria
ABSTRACT Head movement in the locust Schistocerca gregaria is mediated by 14 pairs of muscles. The normal motor output to many of these muscles has been investigated...

Back to Top