Fig. 3.

Spatial cueing improves choice certainty. (A) A 2-AUFC signal detection model incorporating NoGo (opt-out) responses. A key difference from the 2-AFC model (Fig. 2A) is that the animal employs two criterion values (biases, b₁ and b₂) to make a decision in one of three ways: reporting an upper target (ψ > b₂), lower target (ψ < −b₁), or for giving a NoGo response (−b₁ ≤ ψ ≤ b₂). Other conventions are as in Fig. 2A. Red shading represents the probability of an incorrect Go response (error), green shading (including area overlaid by red) represents the probability of a correct response (hit), gray shading represents the probability of a NoGo response (miss), and the hatched area represents the region of overlap for the two distributions. (B) Proportion of NoGo responses without (gray) and with (red) the cue, as a function of target contrast (averaged across distracter contrasts). (C) Psychometric functions of localization accuracy, d′, for performance without (gray) and with (red) the cue, computed with the 2-AUFC signal detection model. Other conventions are as in Fig. 2D. (D) Biases, b₁ and b₂, as a function of target contrast for performance without (gray) and with (red) the cue, computed with the 2-AUFC signal detection model. Other conventions are the same as in Fig. 2E. The negative of b₂ is plotted so that a larger magnitude of b₂ corresponds to more negative values. (E) Bias range (or NoGo bias, |b₁| + |b₂|) as a function of target contrast for performance without (gray) and with (red) the cue. (F) Error-aversion certainty, the certainty of avoiding an error (1 − P_error; area of red shaded region in A), as a function of target contrast for performance without (gray) and with (red) the cue. (G) Median bias (average of b₁ and −b₂) as a function of target contrast for performance without (gray) and with (red) the cue. Other conventions are the same as in Fig. 2E.