Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 94 Lentzeallee, Berlin 14195, Germany.
Cognition. 2018 Mar;172:107-123. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.11.006. Epub 2017 Dec 13.
The investigation of response time and behavior has a long tradition in cognitive psychology, particularly for non-strategic decision-making. Recently, experimental economists have also studied response time in strategic interactions, but with an emphasis on either one-shot games or repeated social-dilemmas. I investigate the determinants of response time in a repeated (pure-conflict) game, admitting a unique mixed strategy Nash equilibrium, with fixed partner matching. Response times depend upon the interaction of two decision models embedded in a dual-process framework (Achtziger and Alós-Ferrer, 2014; Alós-Ferrer, 2016). The first decision model is the commonly used win-stay/lose-shift heuristic and the second the pattern-detecting reinforcement learning model in Spiliopoulos (2013b). The former is less complex and can be executed more quickly than the latter. As predicted, conflict between these two models (i.e., each one recommending a different course of action) led to longer response times than cases without conflict. The dual-process framework makes other qualitative response time predictions arising from the interaction between the existence (or not) of conflict and which one of the two decision models the chosen action is consistent with-these were broadly verified by the data. Other determinants of RT were hypothesized on the basis of existing theory and tested empirically. Response times were strongly dependent on the actions chosen by both players in the previous rounds and the resulting outcomes. Specifically, response time was shortest after a win in the previous round where the maximum possible payoff was obtained; response time after losses was significantly longer. Strongly auto-correlated behavior (regardless of its sign) was also associated with longer response times. I conclude that, similar to other tasks, there is a strong coupling in repeated games between behavior and RT, which can be exploited to further our understanding of decision making.
反应时间和行为的研究在认知心理学中有着悠久的传统,尤其是在非策略决策方面。最近,实验经济学家也研究了战略互动中的反应时间,但重点是一次性博弈或重复的社会困境。我研究了在重复(纯冲突)博弈中反应时间的决定因素,承认存在唯一的混合策略纳什均衡,并允许固定的伙伴匹配。反应时间取决于两个决策模型的相互作用,这些模型嵌入在双过程框架中(Achtziger 和 Alós-Ferrer,2014;Alós-Ferrer,2016)。第一个决策模型是常用的赢留输走启发式,第二个是 Spiliopoulos(2013b)中的模式检测强化学习模型。前者比较简单,可以更快地执行。正如预测的那样,这两个模型之间的冲突(即,每个模型都推荐不同的行动方案)导致的反应时间比没有冲突的情况更长。双过程框架还基于冲突的存在(或不存在)以及所选行动与两个决策模型中的哪一个一致,做出了其他定性的反应时间预测——这些预测在很大程度上被数据所验证。其他反应时间的决定因素是基于现有理论假设的,并通过实证进行了检验。反应时间强烈依赖于前几轮中两个玩家选择的行动和产生的结果。具体来说,在前一轮中获得最大可能收益的情况下获胜,反应时间最短;损失后的反应时间明显更长。强烈自相关的行为(无论其符号如何)也与较长的反应时间相关。我得出结论,与其他任务类似,重复博弈中行为和反应时间之间存在很强的耦合,可以利用这种耦合来进一步理解决策。