Devaluation of Unchosen Options: A Bayesian Account of the Provenance and Maintenance of Overly Optimistic Expectations.

Corey Yishan Zhou, Dalin Guo, Angela J Yu
{"title":"Devaluation of Unchosen Options: A Bayesian Account of the Provenance and Maintenance of Overly Optimistic Expectations.","authors":"Corey Yishan Zhou,&nbsp;Dalin Guo,&nbsp;Angela J Yu","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Humans frequently overestimate the likelihood of desirable events while underestimating the likelihood of undesirable ones: a phenomenon known as <i>unrealistic optimism</i>. Previously, it was suggested that unrealistic optimism arises from asymmetric belief updating, with a relatively reduced coding of undesirable information. Prior studies have shown that a reinforcement learning (RL) model with asymmetric learning rates (greater for a positive prediction error than a negative prediction error) could account for unrealistic optimism in a bandit task, in particular the tendency of human subjects to persistently choosing a single option when there are multiple equally good options. Here, we propose an alternative explanation of such persistent behavior, by modeling human behavior using a Bayesian hidden Markov model, the Dynamic Belief Model (DBM). We find that DBM captures human choice behavior better than the previously proposed asymmetric RL model. Whereas asymmetric RL attains a measure of optimism by giving better-than-expected outcomes higher learning weights compared to worse-than-expected outcomes, DBM does so by progressively devaluing the unchosen options, thus placing a greater emphasis on <i>choice history</i> independent of reward outcome (e.g. an oft-chosen option might continue to be preferred even if it has not been particularly rewarding), which has broadly been shown to underlie sequential effects in a variety of behavioral settings. Moreover, previous work showed that the devaluation of unchosen options in DBM helps to compensate for a default assumption of environmental non-stationarity, thus allowing the decision-maker to both be more adaptive in changing environments and still obtain near-optimal performance in stationary environments. Thus, the current work suggests both a novel rationale and mechanism for persistent behavior in bandit tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":72634,"journal":{"name":"CogSci ... Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society (U.S.). Conference","volume":"42 ","pages":"1682-1688"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8336429/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CogSci ... Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society (U.S.). Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Humans frequently overestimate the likelihood of desirable events while underestimating the likelihood of undesirable ones: a phenomenon known as unrealistic optimism. Previously, it was suggested that unrealistic optimism arises from asymmetric belief updating, with a relatively reduced coding of undesirable information. Prior studies have shown that a reinforcement learning (RL) model with asymmetric learning rates (greater for a positive prediction error than a negative prediction error) could account for unrealistic optimism in a bandit task, in particular the tendency of human subjects to persistently choosing a single option when there are multiple equally good options. Here, we propose an alternative explanation of such persistent behavior, by modeling human behavior using a Bayesian hidden Markov model, the Dynamic Belief Model (DBM). We find that DBM captures human choice behavior better than the previously proposed asymmetric RL model. Whereas asymmetric RL attains a measure of optimism by giving better-than-expected outcomes higher learning weights compared to worse-than-expected outcomes, DBM does so by progressively devaluing the unchosen options, thus placing a greater emphasis on choice history independent of reward outcome (e.g. an oft-chosen option might continue to be preferred even if it has not been particularly rewarding), which has broadly been shown to underlie sequential effects in a variety of behavioral settings. Moreover, previous work showed that the devaluation of unchosen options in DBM helps to compensate for a default assumption of environmental non-stationarity, thus allowing the decision-maker to both be more adaptive in changing environments and still obtain near-optimal performance in stationary environments. Thus, the current work suggests both a novel rationale and mechanism for persistent behavior in bandit tasks.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
未选择选项的贬值:对过度乐观预期的起源和维持的贝叶斯解释。
人类经常高估理想事件发生的可能性,而低估不理想事件发生的可能性:这种现象被称为不切实际的乐观主义。此前,人们认为不切实际的乐观情绪源于不对称的信念更新,不希望的信息编码相对减少。先前的研究表明,具有非对称学习率(积极预测误差大于消极预测误差)的强化学习(RL)模型可以解释强盗任务中不切实际的乐观情绪,特别是当存在多个同样好的选择时,人类受试者坚持选择单一选项的倾向。在这里,我们提出了这种持续行为的另一种解释,通过使用贝叶斯隐马尔可夫模型,即动态信念模型(DBM)对人类行为进行建模。我们发现DBM比之前提出的非对称强化学习模型更好地捕捉了人类的选择行为。非对称强化学习通过给予好于预期的结果比差于预期的结果更高的学习权重来达到一定程度的乐观,而DBM通过逐步贬低未选择的选项来实现这一点,从而更加强调与奖励结果无关的选择历史(例如,一个经常被选择的选项可能会继续受到青睐,即使它没有特别的奖励)。这已经被广泛地证明是一系列行为的基础。此外,先前的研究表明,DBM中未选择选项的贬值有助于补偿环境非平稳性的默认假设,从而使决策者在不断变化的环境中更具适应性,并且仍然在固定环境中获得接近最优的性能。因此,目前的工作为强盗任务中的持续行为提出了一种新的理论基础和机制。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of Fatigue on Word Production in Aphasia. Connecting Adaptive Perceptual Learning and Signal Detection Theory in Skin Cancer Screening. Very Young Infants' Sensitivity to Consonant Mispronunciations in Word Recognition. Verb vocabularies are shaped by complex meanings from the onset of development. A Neural Network Model of Continual Learning with Cognitive Control.
×
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