Ott Torben, Masset Paul, Gouvêa Thiago S, Kepecs Adam
Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Department of Neuroscience and Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Sci Adv. 2022 Feb 11;8(6):eabi7004. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abi7004.
Rational decision makers aim to maximize their gains, but humans and other animals often fail to do so, exhibiting biases and distortions in their choice behavior. In a recent study of economic decisions, humans, mice, and rats were reported to succumb to the sunk cost fallacy, making decisions based on irrecoverable past investments to the detriment of expected future returns. We challenge this interpretation because it is subject to a statistical fallacy, a form of attrition bias, and the observed behavior can be explained without invoking a sunk cost-dependent mechanism. Using a computational model, we illustrate how a rational decision maker with a reward-maximizing decision strategy reproduces the reported behavioral pattern and propose an improved task design to dissociate sunk costs from fluctuations in decision valuation. Similar statistical confounds may be common in analyses of cognitive behaviors, highlighting the need to use causal statistical inference and generative models for interpretation.
理性的决策者旨在实现收益最大化,但人类和其他动物往往做不到这一点,在选择行为中表现出偏差和扭曲。在最近一项关于经济决策的研究中,据报道人类、小鼠和大鼠都屈从于沉没成本谬误,基于不可收回的过去投资做出决策,从而损害了预期的未来回报。我们对这种解释提出质疑,因为它存在统计谬误,这是一种损耗偏差形式,而且观察到的行为无需借助依赖沉没成本的机制就能得到解释。我们使用一个计算模型来说明,一个具有奖励最大化决策策略的理性决策者如何重现所报道的行为模式,并提出一种改进的任务设计,以将沉没成本与决策估值的波动区分开来。类似的统计混淆在认知行为分析中可能很常见,这凸显了使用因果统计推断和生成模型进行解释的必要性。