Back

Recent history attracts and repels perceptual decisions depending on surprise

Kaltenmaier, A.; Press, C.

2026-06-30 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.06.25.734467 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Past sensory experience shapes our perceptual decision-making in the now. Popular models frame perceptual decisions as either attracted towards or repelled away from recent sensory information, but it is unclear when and why these distinct effects emerge. We here ask whether effects turn from attractive to repulsive depending on the level of surprise elicited by the precision-weighted discrepancy between past and present sensory states. This model is based upon the idea that attraction is adaptive for optimizing efficiency and accuracy when discrepancies are small, because they likely reflect sensory noise rather than real change in the environment. In contrast, repulsion may reflect the upweighting of counterfactual evidence when discrepancies are large because they more likely signal the need for model updating. We test this model on a large amount of recently-collated trial-by-trial serial dependence data and consistently find support for it across the dataset, participant, and trial-by-trial level. Specifically, serial dependence effects are attractive at low discrepancies between past and current sensory states but turn repulsive when discrepancies are larger. Higher sensory precision is found to accelerate this flip by reducing the modal discrepancy threshold required to trigger repulsion effects. We discuss how these findings necessitate extending existing theories of serial dependence, and how they may resolve conflicts in the broader predictive processing, learning and perception literatures.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 3%
18.4%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 2%
13.1%
3
Nature Human Behaviour
95 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.9%
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.7%
5
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 24%
6.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
Psychological Review
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
7
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.8%
8
Communications Psychology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
9
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.2%
10
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.4%
11
Journal of Neurophysiology
302 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
12
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
13
Psychological Science
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
14
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
135 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
Cognition
47 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
16
The Journal of Neuroscience
1025 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.3%
17
Cortex
119 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
18
Nature Neuroscience
252 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
19
Neuron
337 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
20
Current Biology
665 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.0%
21
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
22
eneuro
439 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
23
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.8%
24
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.6%
25
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%