Ellerby Zack, Tunney Richard J
School of Computer Science and School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, England1.
School of Psychology, University of Aston, Birmingham, England2.
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2019 Jun 30;15(2):111-126. doi: 10.5709/acp-0261-2. eCollection 2019.
Over a series of decisions between two or more probabilistically rewarded options, humans have a tendency to diversify their choices, even when this will lead to diminished overall reward. In the extreme case of probability matching, this tendency is expressed through allocation of choices in proportion to their likelihood of reward. Research suggests that this behaviour is an instinctive response, driven by heuristics, and that it may be overruled through the application of sufficient deliberation and self-control. However, if this is the case, then how and why did this response become established? The present study explores the hypothesis that diversification of choices, and potentially probability matching, represents an overextension of a historically normative foraging strategy. This is done through examining choice behaviour on a simple simulated foraging task, designed to model the natural process of accumulation of unharvested resources over time. Behaviour was then directly compared with that observed on a standard fixed probability task (cf. Ellerby & Tunney, 2017). Results indicated a convergence of choice patterns on the simulated foraging task, between participants who acted intuitively and those who took a more strategic approach. These findings are also compared with those of another similarly motivated study (Schulze, van Ravenzwaaij, & Newell, 2017).
在一系列涉及两个或更多概率性奖励选项的决策中，人类倾向于使自己的选择多样化，即使这会导致总体奖励减少。在概率匹配的极端情况下，这种倾向表现为根据奖励的可能性来分配选择。研究表明，这种行为是一种由启发式驱动的本能反应，并且通过充分的思考和自我控制可能会被推翻。然而，如果是这样，那么这种反应是如何以及为何形成的呢？本研究探讨了这样一种假设，即选择的多样化以及潜在的概率匹配，代表了一种对历史上规范的觅食策略的过度扩展。这是通过在一个简单的模拟觅食任务中检查选择行为来实现的，该任务旨在模拟未收获资源随时间积累的自然过程。然后将行为直接与在标准固定概率任务中观察到的行为进行比较（参见埃勒比和滕尼，2017年）。结果表明，在模拟觅食任务中，直观行动的参与者和采取更具策略性方法的参与者之间的选择模式趋于一致。这些发现也与另一项动机相似的研究（舒尔茨、范·拉文兹瓦伊和纽厄尔，2017年）的结果进行了比较。
