Literature DB >> 27128170

Observing others stay or switch - How social prediction errors are integrated into reward reversal learning.

Niklas Ihssen1, Thomas Mussweiler2, David E J Linden3.   

Abstract

Reward properties of stimuli can undergo sudden changes, and the detection of these 'reversals' is often made difficult by the probabilistic nature of rewards/punishments. Here we tested whether and how humans use social information (someone else's choices) to overcome uncertainty during reversal learning. We show a substantial social influence during reversal learning, which was modulated by the type of observed behavior. Participants frequently followed observed conservative choices (no switches after punishment) made by the (fictitious) other player but ignored impulsive choices (switches), even though the experiment was set up so that both types of response behavior would be similarly beneficial/detrimental (Study 1). Computational modeling showed that participants integrated the observed choices as a 'social prediction error' instead of ignoring or blindly following the other player. Modeling also confirmed higher learning rates for 'conservative' versus 'impulsive' social prediction errors. Importantly, this 'conservative bias' was boosted by interpersonal similarity, which in conjunction with the lack of effects observed in a non-social control experiment (Study 2) confirmed its social nature. A third study suggested that relative weighting of observed impulsive responses increased with increased volatility (frequency of reversals). Finally, simulations showed that in the present paradigm integrating social and reward information was not necessarily more adaptive to maximize earnings than learning from reward alone. Moreover, integrating social information increased accuracy only when conservative and impulsive choices were weighted similarly during learning. These findings suggest that to guide decisions in choice contexts that involve reward reversals humans utilize social cues conforming with their preconceptions more strongly than cues conflicting with them, especially when the other is similar.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prediction error; Reversal learning; Reward; Similarity; Social influence

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27128170     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.04.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  4 in total

1.  Using reinforcement learning models in social neuroscience: frameworks, pitfalls and suggestions of best practices.

Authors:  Lei Zhang; Lukas Lengersdorff; Nace Mikus; Jan Gläscher; Claus Lamm
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Evidence of absence: no relationship between behaviourally measured prediction error response and schizotypy.

Authors:  Clara S Humpston; Lisa H Evans; Christoph Teufel; Niklas Ihssen; David E J Linden
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychiatry       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 1.871

3.  Timing of social feedback shapes observational learning in strategic interaction.

Authors:  Joshua Zonca; Alexander Vostroknutov; Giorgio Coricelli; Luca Polonio
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  The Role of Intelligence in Social Learning.

Authors:  Alexander Vostroknutov; Luca Polonio; Giorgio Coricelli
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.