Cognitive mechanisms of risky choice: Is there an evaluation cost?

被引:11
|
作者
Aw, Justine [1 ]
Monteiro, Tiago [1 ]
Vasconcelos, Marco [1 ]
Kacelnik, Alex [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Dept Zool, Oxford OX1 3PS, England
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会;
关键词
Risky choice; Sequential Choice Model; Scalar Utility Theory; Expectation of the ratios; Starlings; Food delay; Food amount; SEQUENTIAL CHOICE; RATE CURRENCIES; VARIABILITY; PREFERENCE; STARLINGS; MODELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.beproc.2011.09.007
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
We contrast two classes of choice processes, those assuming time-consuming comparisons and those where stimuli for each option act independently, competing for expression by cross censorship. The Sequential Choice Model (SCM) belongs in the latter category, and has received empirical support in several procedures involving deterministic alternatives. Here we test this model in risky choices. In two treatments, each with five conditions, European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) faced choices between options with unpredictable outcomes and risk-free alternatives. In the delay treatment the five conditions involved choices between a variable option offering two equiprobable delays to reward and a fixed option with delay differing between conditions. The amount treatment was structurally similar, but amount of reward rather than delay was manipulated. As assumed (and required) by the SCM, latency to respond in no-choice trials reflected each option's richness with respect to the background alternatives, and, crucially, preferences in simultaneous choices were predictable from latencies to each option in forced trials. However, we did not detect reliable differences in response times between forced and choice trials, neither the lengthening expected from evaluation models nor the shortening expected from the SCM. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 103
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Emotion and the framing of risky choice
    Druckman, James N.
    McDermott, Rose
    [J]. POLITICAL BEHAVIOR, 2008, 30 (03) : 297 - 321
  • [22] CARDINAL UTILITY AND RISKY CHOICE
    BOUYSSOU, D
    VANSNICK, JC
    [J]. REVUE ECONOMIQUE, 1990, 41 (06): : 979 - 1000
  • [23] Modeling the Dynamics of Risky Choice
    van Rooij, Marieke M. J. W.
    Favela, Luis H.
    Malone, MaryLauren
    Richardson, Michael J.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 25 (03) : 293 - 303
  • [24] STRENGTH OF PREFERENCE AND RISKY CHOICE
    SARIN, RK
    [J]. OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1982, 30 (05) : 982 - 997
  • [25] The formation of preference in risky choice
    Glickman, Moshe
    Sharoni, Orian
    Levy, Dino J.
    Niebur, Ernst
    Stuphorn, Veit
    Usher, Marius
    [J]. PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, 2019, 15 (08)
  • [26] Eye Movements in Risky Choice
    Stewart, Neil
    Hermens, Frouke
    Matthews, William J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2016, 29 (2-3) : 116 - 136
  • [27] Biased confabulation in risky choice
    Mason, Alice
    Madan, Christopher R.
    Simonsen, Nick
    Spetch, Marcia L.
    Ludvig, Elliot A.
    [J]. COGNITION, 2022, 229
  • [28] The minority decision - A risky choice
    Erb, Hans-Peter
    Hilton, Denis J.
    Bohner, Gerd
    Roffey, Lucia
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 57 : 43 - 50
  • [29] EFFICIENT CODING AND RISKY CHOICE
    Frydman, Cary
    Jin, Lawrence J.
    [J]. QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2022, 137 (01): : 161 - 213
  • [30] The role of context in risky choice
    Meyer, Stephen F.
    Schley, Dan R.
    Fantino, Edmund
    [J]. BEHAVIOURAL PROCESSES, 2011, 87 (01) : 100 - 105