Anticipation and choice heuristics in the dynamic consumption of pain relief.
Anticipation and choice heuristics in the dynamic consumption of pain relief.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004030
复制
发表时间：
2015-03
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Dolan RJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Story GW;Vlaev I;Dayan P;Seymour B;Darzi A;Dolan RJ
人类经常需要跨多个时间步分配资源。经济学理论认为，受试者是根据一套稳定的跨期偏好来做这些决定的，但这种决策的计算需求鼓励他们使用形式上不太称职的逻辑学。很少有实证研究系统地研究动态资源配置决策。在这里，我们进行了一项实验，涉及动态消费超过约15分钟的有限预算的救济，从中度疼痛的刺激。我们之前已经在一次性选择中引出了参与者对相同痛苦刺激的时间偏好，使我们能够评估自我一致性。参与者表现出三种典型的行为：将救济储蓄到最后，将救济分散在时间上，以及早期消费，其中最后一种明显不那么突出。一次性选择和动态选择之间的弱对应性表明，行为可能是启发性的而不是规范性的。我们发现，消费选择是一致的，涉及早期支出，传播或保存救济，直到最后，与科目主要表现出最后两个简单的economistics的组合。人们常常不得不在他们现在的幸福和未来的幸福之间进行权衡，例如，今天是去一家昂贵的餐馆，还是把钱花在未来的度假上。许多研究已经研究了人们是如何做出这种权衡的。然而，大多数人通过分析一次性未来结果之间的选择来这样做。相比之下，现实世界的选择往往是顺序进行的，今天的选择会影响明天的可能性。这产生了几乎无限复杂的决策问题。为了探索人们如何在自然主义（健康相关）环境中做出这样的决定，我们描述了参与者在大约15分钟的时间内使用有限的预算来缓解中度疼痛刺激。参与者表现出一系列不同的行为，大多数人要么为未来保留救济，要么更喜欢在一段时间内均匀分配救济。值得注意的是，没有参与者在一开始就持续消耗最大允许救济。我们发现，顺序决策行为不能很容易地预测的结果，简单的一次性选择在任务开始时。
Humans frequently need to allocate resources across multiple time-steps. Economic theory proposes that subjects do so according to a stable set of intertemporal preferences, but the computational demands of such decisions encourage the use of formally less competent heuristics. Few empirical studies have examined dynamic resource allocation decisions systematically. Here we conducted an experiment involving the dynamic consumption over approximately 15 minutes of a limited budget of relief from moderately painful stimuli. We had previously elicited the participants’ time preferences for the same painful stimuli in one-off choices, allowing us to assess self-consistency. Participants exhibited three characteristic behaviors: saving relief until the end, spreading relief across time, and early spending, of which the last was markedly less prominent. The likelihood that behavior was heuristic rather than normative is suggested by the weak correspondence between one-off and dynamic choices. We show that the consumption choices are consistent with a combination of simple heuristics involving early-spending, spreading or saving of relief until the end, with subjects predominantly exhibiting the last two. People often have to trade-off their present wellbeing against their future wellbeing, for example whether to go to an expensive restaurant today or put the money towards a future holiday. Many studies have examined how people make such trade-offs. However, the majority have done so by analyzing choices between one-off future outcomes. By contrast, real-world choices are often made sequentially, with today’s choices influencing the possibilities available tomorrow. This generates decision problems of near limitless complexity. To explore how people approach such decisions in a naturalistic (health-related) setting, we describe participants’ use of a limited budget of relief from moderately painful stimuli over a period of approximately 15 minutes. Participants showed a range of different behaviors, with the majority either conserving relief for the future, or preferring to spread relief evenly over time. Notably no participant consistently consumed the maximum allowable relief at the outset. We show that sequential decision-making behavior cannot easily be predicted from the results of simple one-off choices made at the beginning of the task.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
13.5
作者：
Bickel, Warren K.;Jarmolowicz, David P.;Mueller, E. Terry;Koffarnus, Mikhail N.;Gatchalian, Kirstin M.
通讯作者：
Gatchalian, Kirstin M.
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Elliott, R.;Agnew, Z.;Deakin, J. F. W.
通讯作者：
Deakin, J. F. W.
影响因子：
3
作者：
Kurth-Nelson, Zeb;Redish, A. David
通讯作者：
Redish, A. David
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Frederick, Shane;Loewenstein, George
通讯作者：
Loewenstein, George
影响因子：
16.2
作者：
Crockett MJ;Braams BR;Clark L;Tobler PN;Robbins TW;Kalenscher T
通讯作者：
Kalenscher T