Decision making by humans in a behavioral task: Do humans, like pigeons, show suboptimal choice?
Decision making by humans in a behavioral task: Do humans, like pigeons, show suboptimal choice?
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13420-012-0065-7
复制
发表时间：
2012-12-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Zentall, Thomas R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Molet, Mikael;Miller, Holly C.;Zentall, Thomas R.
与人类的赌博行为一致，但与最佳觅食理论相反，鸽子表现出对低概率和高回报的替代方案（类似赌博的替代方案）的强烈偏好，而不是具有更大净回报的替代方案（Zentall & Stagner, Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278, 1203-1208, 2011）。在目前的研究中，我们询问人类是否会在涉及与鸽子相似的概率选择的任务中表现出次优选择。在实验 1 中，当我们根据参与者自我报告的赌博活动选择参与者时，我们发现与报告不存在赌博活动的组相比，涉及低概率和高回报的替代方案（类似赌博的替代方案）的选择明显更多。在实验2中，我们发现，当典型人类的抑制能力因自我调节耗尽操作而受损时，他们更有可能选择类似赌博的替代方案。总而言之，结果表明该任务适合对次优决策行为及其背后机制进行比较研究。
Consistent with human gambling behavior but contrary to optimal foraging theory, pigeons show a strong preference for an alternative with low probability and high payoff (a gambling-like alternative) over an alternative with a greater net payoff (Zentall & Stagner, Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278, 1203-1208, 2011). In the present research, we asked whether humans would show suboptimal choice on a task involving choices with probabilities similar to those for pigeons. In Experiment 1, when we selected participants on the basis of their self-reported gambling activities, we found a significantly greater choice of the alternative involving low probability and high payoff (gambling-like alternative) than for a group that reported an absence of gambling activity. In Experiment 2, we found that when the inhibiting abilities of typical humans were impaired by a self-regulatory depletion manipulation, they were more likely to choose the gambling-like alternative. Taken together, the results suggest that this task is suitable for the comparative study of suboptimal decision-making behavior and the mechanisms that underlie it.