Literature DB >> 33411720

Computational modeling of choice-induced preference change: A Reinforcement-Learning-based approach.

Jianhong Zhu1, Junya Hashimoto2, Kentaro Katahira3, Makoto Hirakawa1, Takashi Nakao1.   

Abstract

The value learning process has been investigated using decision-making tasks with a correct answer specified by the external environment (externally guided decision-making, EDM). In EDM, people are required to adjust their choices based on feedback, and the learning process is generally explained by the reinforcement learning (RL) model. In addition to EDM, value is learned through internally guided decision-making (IDM), in which no correct answer defined by external circumstances is available, such as preference judgment. In IDM, it has been believed that the value of the chosen item is increased and that of the rejected item is decreased (choice-induced preference change; CIPC). An RL-based model called the choice-based learning (CBL) model had been proposed to describe CIPC, in which the values of chosen and/or rejected items are updated as if own choice were the correct answer. However, the validity of the CBL model has not been confirmed by fitting the model to IDM behavioral data. The present study aims to examine the CBL model in IDM. We conducted simulations, a preference judgment task for novel contour shapes, and applied computational model analyses to the behavioral data. The results showed that the CBL model with both the chosen and rejected value's updated were a good fit for the IDM behavioral data compared to the other candidate models. Although previous studies using subjective preference ratings had repeatedly reported changes only in one of the values of either the chosen or rejected items, we demonstrated for the first time both items' value changes were based solely on IDM choice behavioral data with computational model analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33411720      PMCID: PMC7790366          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244434

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  37 in total

1.  Adaptive decision making, ecological validity, and the frontal lobes.

Authors:  E Goldberg; K Podell
Journal:  J Clin Exp Neuropsychol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.475

2.  [Perceptual judgments of novel contour shapes and hierarchical descriptions of geometrical properties].

Authors:  Nobutaka Endo; Jun Saiki; Yoko Nakao; Hirofumi Saito
Journal:  Shinrigaku Kenkyu       Date:  2003-10

Review 3.  The computational neurobiology of learning and reward.

Authors:  Nathaniel D Daw; Kenji Doya
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2006-03-24       Impact factor: 6.627

4.  Brain and autonomic association accompanying stochastic decision-making.

Authors:  Hideki Ohira; Naho Ichikawa; Michio Nomura; Tokiko Isowa; Kenta Kimura; Noriaki Kanayama; Seisuke Fukuyama; Jun Shinoda; Jitsuhiro Yamada
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  From neuronal to psychological noise - Long-range temporal correlations in EEG intrinsic activity reduce noise in internally-guided decision making.

Authors:  Takashi Nakao; Madoka Miyagi; Ryosuke Hiramoto; Annemarie Wolff; Javier Gomez-Pilar; Makoto Miyatani; Georg Northoff
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Decision-making based on emotional images.

Authors:  Kentaro Katahira; Tomomi Fujimura; Kazuo Okanoya; Masato Okada
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-10-28

7.  Sour grapes and sweet victories: How actions shape preferences.

Authors:  Fabien Vinckier; Lionel Rigoux; Irma T Kurniawan; Chen Hu; Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde; Jean Daunizeau; Mathias Pessiglione
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 4.475

8.  PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy.

Authors:  Jonathan Peirce; Jeremy R Gray; Sol Simpson; Michael MacAskill; Richard Höchenberger; Hiroyuki Sogo; Erik Kastman; Jonas Kristoffer Lindeløv
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2019-02

9.  Choosing what we like vs liking what we choose: How choice-induced preference change might actually be instrumental to decision-making.

Authors:  Douglas Lee; Jean Daunizeau
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Post-response βγ power predicts the degree of choice-based learning in internally guided decision-making.

Authors:  Takashi Nakao; Noriaki Kanayama; Kentaro Katahira; Misaki Odani; Yosuke Ito; Yuki Hirata; Reika Nasuno; Hanako Ozaki; Ryosuke Hiramoto; Makoto Miyatani; Georg Northoff
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  1 in total

1.  Correction: Computational modeling of choice-induced preference change: A Reinforcement-Learning-based approach.

Authors:  Jianhong Zhu; Junya Hashimoto; Kentaro Katahira; Makoto Hirakawa; Takashi Nakao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.