Karamched Bhargav, Stolarczyk Simon, Kilpatrick Zachary P, Josić Krešimir
Department of Mathematics, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204.
Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309.
SIAM J Appl Dyn Syst. 2020;19(3):1884-1919. doi: 10.1137/19m1283793. Epub 2020 Aug 18.
To make decisions we are guided by the evidence we collect and the opinions of friends and neighbors. How do we combine our private beliefs with information we obtain from our social network? To understand the strategies humans use to do so, it is useful to compare them to observers that optimally integrate all evidence. Here we derive network models of rational (Bayes optimal) agents who accumulate private measurements and observe the decisions of their neighbors to make an irreversible choice between two options. The resulting information exchange dynamics has interesting properties: When decision thresholds are asymmetric, the absence of a decision can be increasingly informative over time. In a recurrent network of two agents, the absence of a decision can lead to a sequence of belief updates akin to those in the literature on common knowledge. On the other hand, in larger networks a single decision can trigger a cascade of agreements and disagreements that depend on the private information agents have gathered. Our approach provides a bridge between social decision making models in the economics literature, which largely ignore the temporal dynamics of decisions, and the single-observer evidence accumulator models used widely in neuroscience and psychology.
我们依据收集到的证据以及朋友和邻居的意见来做决策。我们如何将自己的个人信念与从社交网络中获取的信息相结合呢?为了理解人类用于此的策略,将他们与能最优整合所有证据的观察者进行比较是很有用的。在这里,我们推导了理性(贝叶斯最优)主体的网络模型,这些主体积累个人测量值并观察邻居的决策,以便在两个选项之间做出不可逆转的选择。由此产生的信息交换动态具有有趣的特性:当决策阈值不对称时,随着时间的推移,未做出决策可能会越来越具有信息量。在由两个主体组成的循环网络中,未做出决策可能会导致一系列信念更新,类似于关于常识的文献中的那些更新。另一方面,在更大的网络中,单个决策可能会引发一系列取决于主体所收集的私人信息的同意和不同意。我们的方法在经济学文献中很大程度上忽略决策时间动态的社会决策模型与神经科学和心理学中广泛使用的单观察者证据积累模型之间架起了一座桥梁。