Differential effects of prior outcomes and pauses on the speed and quality of risky choices

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-02-03 DOI:10.1002/bdm.2370
Zhang Chen, Charlotte Eben, Frederick Verbruggen
{"title":"Differential effects of prior outcomes and pauses on the speed and quality of risky choices","authors":"Zhang Chen,&nbsp;Charlotte Eben,&nbsp;Frederick Verbruggen","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Failures to obtain rewards influence what people choose to do next and how quickly they execute a chosen action, which are two components of motivated behavior. For instance, in risky decisions, losses can induce faster responses and sometimes increase risk-taking, which may lead to detrimental consequences in some situations (such as gambling). Pauses might reduce these motivational influences of prior outcomes. To examine this question, participants alternated between a guess game, in which they won or lost money, and a choice game, in which they chose between a high probability of winning a small amount of money and a low probability of winning a large amount of money. The pause between a guess and a choice game was made either short (0 or 300 ms) or long (3000 ms). In four experiments, prior outcomes consistently influenced decision speed, such that people chose faster after a loss than after a win. However, prior outcomes did not consistently influence people's choices. In contrast, pauses increased decision quality, such that participants chose the option with a higher expected value more often, without substantially reducing decision speed. Pauses may improve decision quality by influencing predecisional attention allocation to relevant information, as its effect was absent when the overall task attention was high (Experiment 3). These findings have implications for both safer gambling and risky decision research. Future work can examine the underlying computational and cognitive processes and the generalizability of these findings to other contexts and populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2370","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Failures to obtain rewards influence what people choose to do next and how quickly they execute a chosen action, which are two components of motivated behavior. For instance, in risky decisions, losses can induce faster responses and sometimes increase risk-taking, which may lead to detrimental consequences in some situations (such as gambling). Pauses might reduce these motivational influences of prior outcomes. To examine this question, participants alternated between a guess game, in which they won or lost money, and a choice game, in which they chose between a high probability of winning a small amount of money and a low probability of winning a large amount of money. The pause between a guess and a choice game was made either short (0 or 300 ms) or long (3000 ms). In four experiments, prior outcomes consistently influenced decision speed, such that people chose faster after a loss than after a win. However, prior outcomes did not consistently influence people's choices. In contrast, pauses increased decision quality, such that participants chose the option with a higher expected value more often, without substantially reducing decision speed. Pauses may improve decision quality by influencing predecisional attention allocation to relevant information, as its effect was absent when the overall task attention was high (Experiment 3). These findings have implications for both safer gambling and risky decision research. Future work can examine the underlying computational and cognitive processes and the generalizability of these findings to other contexts and populations.

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
先前结果和停顿对风险选择的速度和质量的不同影响
无法获得奖励会影响人们下一步选择做什么,以及他们执行所选行动的速度,这是动机行为的两个组成部分。例如,在有风险的决策中,损失会促使人们做出更快的反应,有时还会增加冒险行为,这在某些情况下(如赌博)可能会导致有害后果。暂停可能会减少先前结果对动机的影响。为了研究这个问题,参与者在猜测游戏和选择游戏之间交替进行,在猜测游戏中,他们会赢钱或输钱,而在选择游戏中,他们会在赢少量钱的高概率和赢大量钱的低概率之间做出选择。猜测游戏和选择游戏之间的停顿时间可以很短(0 或 300 毫秒),也可以很长(3000 毫秒)。在四项实验中,先前的结果始终影响着人们的决策速度,例如,人们在输钱后比赢钱后更快做出选择。然而,先前的结果并没有持续影响人们的选择。与此相反,暂停提高了决策质量,使参与者更经常地选择预期值更高的选项,而不会大幅降低决策速度。暂停可能是通过影响决策前对相关信息的注意力分配来提高决策质量的,因为当整体任务注意力较高时,暂停的效果并不明显(实验 3)。这些发现对更安全的赌博和风险决策研究都有意义。未来的工作可以研究潜在的计算和认知过程,以及这些发现在其他情境和人群中的可推广性。
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
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Prescribing Agreement Improves Judgments and Decisions Issue Information Do We Use Relatively Bad (Algorithmic) Advice? The Effects of Performance Feedback and Advice Representation on Advice Usage Evaluation of Extended Decision Outcomes Diffusion of Responsibility for Actions With Advice
×
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