Literature DB >> 22635271

Salience driven value integration explains decision biases and preference reversal.

Konstantinos Tsetsos1, Nick Chater, Marius Usher.   

Abstract

Human choice behavior exhibits many paradoxical and challenging patterns. Traditional explanations focus on how values are represented, but little is known about how values are integrated. Here we outline a psychophysical task for value integration that can be used as a window on high-level, multiattribute decisions. Participants choose between alternative rapidly presented streams of numerical values. By controlling the temporal distribution of the values, we demonstrate that this process underlies many puzzling choice paradoxes, such as temporal, risk, and framing biases, as well as preference reversals. These phenomena can be explained by a simple mechanism based on the integration of values, weighted by their salience. The salience of a sampled value depends on its temporal order and momentary rank in the decision context, whereas the direction of the weighting is determined by the task framing. We show that many known choice anomalies may arise from the microstructure of the value integration process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22635271      PMCID: PMC3386128          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1119569109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  21 in total

1.  Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice.

Authors:  Marius Usher; James L McClelland
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 2.  Choosing the greater of two goods: neural currencies for valuation and decision making.

Authors:  Leo P Sugrue; Greg S Corrado; William T Newsome
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 34.870

3.  Modeling the effects of payoff on response bias in a perceptual discrimination task: bound-change, drift-rate-change, or two-stage-processing hypothesis.

Authors:  Adele Diederich; Jerome R Busemeyer
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2006-02

4.  Decision by sampling.

Authors:  Neil Stewart; Nick Chater; Gordon D A Brown
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks.

Authors:  Rafal Bogacz; Eric Brown; Jeff Moehlis; Philip Holmes; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Decisions from experience: why small samples?

Authors:  Ralph Hertwig; Timothy J Pleskac
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-01-25

7.  Reason-based choice.

Authors:  E Shafir; I Simonson; A Tversky
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1993 Oct-Nov

8.  Strategies for multiattribute binary choice.

Authors:  J E Russo; B A Dosher
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Integration of sensory and reward information during perceptual decision-making in lateral intraparietal cortex (LIP) of the macaque monkey.

Authors:  Alan E Rorie; Juan Gao; James L McClelland; William T Newsome
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Testing multi-alternative decision models with non-stationary evidence.

Authors:  Konstantinos Tsetsos; Marius Usher; James L McClelland
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2011-05-04       Impact factor: 4.677

View more
  57 in total

1.  Comparing perceptual and preferential decision making.

Authors:  Gilles Dutilh; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-06

2.  Value-based attentional capture affects multi-alternative decision making.

Authors:  Sebastian Gluth; Mikhail S Spektor; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2018-11-05       Impact factor: 8.140

3.  Magnitude and incentives: revisiting the overweighting of extreme events in risky decisions from experience.

Authors:  Emmanouil Konstantinidis; Robert T Taylor; Ben R Newell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-10

4.  Biasing moral decisions by exploiting the dynamics of eye gaze.

Authors:  Philip Pärnamets; Petter Johansson; Lars Hall; Christian Balkenius; Michael J Spivey; Daniel C Richardson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Salience-Driven Value Construction for Adaptive Choice under Risk.

Authors:  Mehran Spitmaan; Emily Chu; Alireza Soltani
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Economic irrationality is optimal during noisy decision making.

Authors:  Konstantinos Tsetsos; Rani Moran; James Moreland; Nick Chater; Marius Usher; Christopher Summerfield
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  A Bayesian model of context-sensitive value attribution.

Authors:  Francesco Rigoli; Karl J Friston; Cristina Martinelli; Mirjana Selaković; Sukhwinder S Shergill; Raymond J Dolan
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 8.  Do humans make good decisions?

Authors:  Christopher Summerfield; Konstantinos Tsetsos
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Adaptive gain control during human perceptual choice.

Authors:  Samuel Cheadle; Valentin Wyart; Konstantinos Tsetsos; Nicholas Myers; Vincent de Gardelle; Santiago Herce Castañón; Christopher Summerfield
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  Rapid decisions from experience.

Authors:  Matthew D Zeigenfuse; Timothy J Pleskac; Taosheng Liu
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2014-02-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.