Disentangling the contribution of individual and social learning processes in human advice-taking behavior

IF 3.6 1区 心理学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH npj Science of Learning Pub Date : 2024-01-20 DOI:10.1038/s41539-024-00214-0
Maayan Pereg, Uri Hertz, Ido Ben-Artzi, Nitzan Shahar
{"title":"Disentangling the contribution of individual and social learning processes in human advice-taking behavior","authors":"Maayan Pereg, Uri Hertz, Ido Ben-Artzi, Nitzan Shahar","doi":"10.1038/s41539-024-00214-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The study of social learning examines how individuals learn from others by means of observation, imitation, or compliance with advice. However, it still remains largely unknown whether social learning processes have a distinct contribution to behavior, independent from non-social trial-and-error learning that often occurs simultaneously. 153 participants completed a reinforcement learning task, where they were asked to make choices to gain rewards. Advice from an artificial teacher was presented in 60% of the trials, allowing us to compare choice behavior with and without advice. Results showed a strong and reliable tendency to follow advice (test-retest reliability ~0.73). Computational modeling suggested a unique contribution of three distinct learning strategies: (a) individual learning (i.e., learning the value of actions, independent of advice), (b) informed advice-taking (i.e., learning the value of following advice), and (c) non-informed advice-taking (i.e., a constant bias to follow advice regardless of outcome history). Comparing artificial and empirical data provided specific behavioral regression signatures to both informed and non-informed advice taking processes. We discuss the theoretical implications of integrating internal and external information during the learning process.</p>","PeriodicalId":48503,"journal":{"name":"npj Science of Learning","volume":"210 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj Science of Learning","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00214-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study of social learning examines how individuals learn from others by means of observation, imitation, or compliance with advice. However, it still remains largely unknown whether social learning processes have a distinct contribution to behavior, independent from non-social trial-and-error learning that often occurs simultaneously. 153 participants completed a reinforcement learning task, where they were asked to make choices to gain rewards. Advice from an artificial teacher was presented in 60% of the trials, allowing us to compare choice behavior with and without advice. Results showed a strong and reliable tendency to follow advice (test-retest reliability ~0.73). Computational modeling suggested a unique contribution of three distinct learning strategies: (a) individual learning (i.e., learning the value of actions, independent of advice), (b) informed advice-taking (i.e., learning the value of following advice), and (c) non-informed advice-taking (i.e., a constant bias to follow advice regardless of outcome history). Comparing artificial and empirical data provided specific behavioral regression signatures to both informed and non-informed advice taking processes. We discuss the theoretical implications of integrating internal and external information during the learning process.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
厘清个人和社会学习过程在人类接受建议行为中的作用
社会学习研究探讨的是个体如何通过观察、模仿或听从建议等方式向他人学习。然而,社会学习过程是否对行为有独特的贡献,是否独立于经常同时发生的非社会试错学习,这在很大程度上仍然是个未知数。153 名参与者完成了一项强化学习任务,要求他们做出选择以获得奖励。在60%的试验中,人工教师会提出建议,这样我们就可以比较有建议和没有建议时的选择行为。结果表明,他们有强烈而可靠的听从建议的倾向(测试-再测可靠性约为0.73)。计算模型显示了三种不同学习策略的独特贡献:(a) 个人学习(即学习行动的价值,与建议无关),(b) 知情建议采纳(即学习采纳建议的价值),(c) 非知情建议采纳(即无论结果如何,始终倾向于采纳建议)。人工数据与经验数据的比较为知情和非知情建议采纳过程提供了具体的行为回归特征。我们讨论了在学习过程中整合内部和外部信息的理论意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Exploring the potential of LLM to enhance teaching plans through teaching simulation. Non-linear development in statistical learning of visual orthographic regularities. COVID-19, school closures, and student learning outcomes. New global evidence from PISA. Effects of described demonstrator ability on brain and behavior when learning from others. Faster implicit motor sequence learning of new sequences compatible in terms of movement transitions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1