Collaborative Research: Social and contextual influences on the formation of expectations about reward outcomes across the Primates

合作研究：社会和背景对灵长类动物奖励结果期望形成的影响

• 批准号: 1424333
• 负责人: Steven Schapiro
• 金额: $ 35.59万
• 依托单位: University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2014
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2014-09-15 至 2018-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1424333&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Social; contextual; influences

When faced with a choice, humans often make decisions based on their observations of the results of similar decisions made by other people. Although in some cases such comparisons can help determine the best outcome, in other contexts, such social comparisons can lead to less than optimal, and even potentially negative, decisions or outcomes. For instance, when making decisions related to personal or family economics, people may observe others (peers, colleagues, neighbors, family, etc.), to determine what is "normal" or "appropriate," potentially leading to expenditures that essentially cannot be afforded (colloquially known as (keeping up with the Joneses') and therefore, increase their risk of financial ruin. Similarly, observations of peers, neighbors, or colleagues may lead to comparisons that result in the making of "risky" decisions, again with potentially negative outcomes. Understanding how and why people observe and apply the decisions made by other people to the making of their own decisions, even when such comparisons are not valid or are even actively misleading, may aid in the development of strategies that can be used to help people make good decisions and minimize the probability that they will make poor ones. Because people are faced with decision-making situations on a daily basis, this research will be important for helping people to develop strategies that will help them make good decisions that promote well-being. In this project, the Principal Investigators will study the factors that influence decision-making when individuals rely on what others receive to determine their expected outcome, also known as a reference point. Our first research goal is to explore how these reference points influence what people expect their outcomes to be. In particular, we are interested in what happens if those expectations are violated. Additionally, we are interested in what other factors surrounding the decision may influence the degree to which these reference points are used to establish expectations. These contexts include the riskiness of the situation, the degree to which an observed outcome conforms to what is typical (e.g., is only one other person receiving that outcome, or is everyone else receiving that outcome?), and, in situations in which expectations are violated, whether there is a good rationale for why one's own outcome might differ from what is expected. Our second research goal is to understand the evolution of these behaviors. This is important because by understanding the broader biological and psychological foundations, mechanisms, and processes, we can begin to design effective interventions to counteract sub-optimal decision-making. One way to understand the biological foundations of human decision-making behavior is to explore these questions in nonhuman species. We will use methods from experimental economics to explore 1) how risk interacts with individuals' expectations about their outcomes, 2) how the social context influences individuals' expectations, and 3) whether individuals respond differently if there is a rationale for a perceived violation of expectations. Together these questions will provide an understanding of how social comparison may drive decision-making processes that could lead to negative outcomes in certain contexts. In terms of broader impacts, we have a strong focus on providing training in the scientific method to the next generation of scientists. This includes engaging undergraduate and graduate students and postdoctoral fellows in all levels of the research involved in this proposal. We will also bring this research to K-12 students in order to generate enthusiasm for science while these students are young. Additionally, good decision-making should positively impact people of all ages, so it is a particularly relevant and important topic that should easily engage students during their formative years. We accomplish this engagement by presenting our science in area K-12 schools and through community involvement in science, such as participating in public "science nights" at local schools and involvement in science fairs by both the PIs and our students. More broadly, people encounter daily the sorts of decisions that we are exploring, and good decision making in these situations directly impacts financial, physical, and psychological well-being.

当面临选择时，人类通常会根据对其他人做出的类似决定的结果的观察来做出决定。 虽然在某些情况下，这种比较可以帮助确定最佳结果，但在其他情况下，这种社会比较可能导致不太理想，甚至可能是负面的决定或结果。 例如，当做出与个人或家庭经济有关的决策时，人们可能会观察其他人（同龄人，同事，邻居，家人等），以确定什么是“正常”或“适当的”，可能导致基本上无法负担的支出（俗称为“跟上琼斯”），因此，增加了他们的财务破产的风险。 类似地，对同伴、邻居或同事的观察可能会导致比较，从而导致做出“冒险”的决定，同样也会带来潜在的负面结果。 了解人们如何以及为什么观察他人的决策，并将其应用于自己的决策，即使这种比较是无效的，甚至是积极的误导，也有助于制定策略，帮助人们做出正确的决策，并最大限度地减少他们做出错误决策的可能性。 因为人们每天都面临着决策的情况，这项研究对于帮助人们制定策略，帮助他们做出促进幸福的良好决策非常重要。 在这个项目中，主要研究人员将研究影响决策的因素，当个人依赖于别人收到什么来确定他们的预期结果，也被称为参考点。 我们的第一个研究目标是探索这些参考点如何影响人们对结果的期望。特别是，我们感兴趣的是，如果这些期望被违反会发生什么。 此外，我们感兴趣的是，围绕决策的其他因素可能会影响这些参考点用于建立预期的程度。这些背景包括情况的风险性，观察到的结果与典型结果的一致程度（例如，是只有一个人接受这个结果，还是其他人都接受这个结果？）以及，在违背预期的情况下，是否有一个很好的理由来解释为什么自己的结果可能与预期不同。我们的第二个研究目标是了解这些行为的演变。这一点很重要，因为通过了解更广泛的生物学和心理学基础、机制和过程，我们可以开始设计有效的干预措施来抵制次优决策。 了解人类决策行为的生物学基础的一种方法是在非人类物种中探索这些问题。我们将使用实验经济学的方法来探索1）风险如何与个人对结果的预期相互作用，2）社会背景如何影响个人的预期，以及3）如果有理由认为违反预期，个人是否会做出不同的反应。 这些问题将有助于理解社会比较如何推动决策过程，从而在某些情况下导致负面结果。在更广泛的影响方面，我们非常注重为下一代科学家提供科学方法的培训。这包括让本科生、研究生和博士后研究员参与本提案所涉及的各级研究。我们还将把这项研究带到K-12学生，以便在这些学生年轻时产生对科学的热情。 此外，良好的决策应该对所有年龄段的人产生积极的影响，因此这是一个特别相关和重要的话题，应该很容易让学生在他们的成长期参与进来。我们通过在K-12地区的学校展示我们的科学，并通过社区参与科学来实现这种参与，例如参加当地学校的公共“科学之夜”，并参与PI和我们的学生的科学博览会。 更广泛地说，人们每天都会遇到我们正在探索的各种决策，在这些情况下做出良好的决策直接影响财务，身体和心理健康。