Literature DB >> 33234567

Using dynamic monitoring of choices to predict and understand risk preferences.

Paul E Stillman1, Ian Krajbich2,3, Melissa J Ferguson4.   

Abstract

Navigating conflict is integral to decision-making, serving a central role both in the subjective experience of choice as well as contemporary theories of how we choose. However, the lack of a sensitive, accessible, and interpretable metric of conflict has led researchers to focus on choice itself rather than how individuals arrive at that choice. Using mouse-tracking-continuously sampling computer mouse location as participants decide-we demonstrate the theoretical and practical uses of dynamic assessments of choice from decision onset through conclusion. Specifically, we use mouse tracking to index conflict, quantified by the relative directness to the chosen option, in a domain for which conflict is integral: decisions involving risk. In deciding whether to accept risk, decision makers must integrate gains, losses, status quos, and outcome probabilities, a process that inevitably involves conflict. Across three preregistered studies, we tracked participants' motor movements while they decided whether to accept or reject gambles. Our results show that 1) mouse-tracking metrics of conflict sensitively detect differences in the subjective value of risky versus certain options; 2) these metrics of conflict strongly predict participants' risk preferences (loss aversion and decreasing marginal utility), even on a single-trial level; 3) these mouse-tracking metrics outperform participants' reaction times in predicting risk preferences; and 4) manipulating risk preferences via a broad versus narrow bracketing manipulation influences conflict as indexed by mouse tracking. Together, these results highlight the importance of measuring conflict during risky choice and demonstrate the usefulness of mouse tracking as a tool to do so.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision-making; dynamic processes; mouse tracking; prospect theory; risk

Year:  2020        PMID: 33234567      PMCID: PMC7749332          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2010056117

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


  37 in total

1.  The neural basis of error detection: conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity.

Authors:  Nick Yeung; Matthew M Botvinick; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Consuming now or later? The interactive effect of timing and attribute alignability.

Authors:  Selin A Malkoc; Gal Zauberman; Canan Ulu
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-05

Review 3.  The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.026

4.  Multialternative drift-diffusion model predicts the relationship between visual fixations and choice in value-based decisions.

Authors:  Ian Krajbich; Antonio Rangel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Dietary self-control is related to the speed with which attributes of healthfulness and tastiness are processed.

Authors:  Nicolette Sullivan; Cendri Hutcherson; Alison Harris; Antonio Rangel
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2014-12-16

6.  The self-organization of explicit attitudes.

Authors:  Michael T Wojnowicz; Melissa J Ferguson; Rick Dale; Michael J Spivey
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2009-10-08

7.  Motions of the hand expose the partial and parallel activation of stereotypes.

Authors:  Jonathan B Freeman; Nalini Ambady
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2009-08-14

8.  Revealing Neurocomputational Mechanisms of Reinforcement Learning and Decision-Making With the hBayesDM Package.

Authors:  Woo-Young Ahn; Nathaniel Haines; Lei Zhang
Journal:  Comput Psychiatr       Date:  2017-10-01

9.  Amount and time exert independent influences on intertemporal choice.

Authors:  Dianna R Amasino; Nicolette J Sullivan; Rachel E Kranton; Scott A Huettel
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2019-02-25

10.  Mouse tracking reveals structure knowledge in the absence of model-based choice.

Authors:  Arkady Konovalov; Ian Krajbich
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making.

Authors:  R Frömer; A Shenhav
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 8.989

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.