Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Psychol Sci. 2010 Jul;21(7):960-9. doi: 10.1177/0956797610372637. Epub 2010 Jun 4.
Deciding which piece of information to acquire or attend to is fundamental to perception, categorization, medical diagnosis, and scientific inference. Four statistical theories of the value of information-information gain, Kullback-Liebler distance, probability gain (error minimization), and impact-are equally consistent with extant data on human information acquisition. Three experiments, designed via computer optimization to be maximally informative, tested which of these theories best describes human information search. Experiment 1, which used natural sampling and experience-based learning to convey environmental probabilities, found that probability gain explained subjects' information search better than the other statistical theories or the probability-of-certainty heuristic. Experiments 1 and 2 found that subjects behaved differently when the standard method of verbally presented summary statistics (rather than experience-based learning) was used to convey environmental probabilities. Experiment 3 found that subjects' preference for probability gain is robust, suggesting that the other models contribute little to subjects' search behavior.
确定获取或关注哪些信息对于感知、分类、医学诊断和科学推理至关重要。信息价值的四种统计理论——信息增益、Kullback-Leibler 距离、概率增益(错误最小化)和影响——都与人类信息获取的现有数据一致。三个实验通过计算机优化设计,旨在获取最大信息量,测试了这些理论中哪一个最能描述人类的信息搜索。实验 1 利用自然抽样和基于经验的学习来传达环境概率,发现概率增益比其他统计理论或确定性概率启发式更能解释被试的信息搜索。实验 1 和 2 发现,当使用口头呈现的汇总统计数据的标准方法(而不是基于经验的学习)来传达环境概率时,被试的行为会有所不同。实验 3 发现,被试对概率增益的偏好是稳健的,这表明其他模型对被试的搜索行为贡献不大。