The construction and deconstruction of sub-optimal preferences through range-adapting reinforcement learning
Bavard, S.; Rustichini, A.; Palminteri, S.
Show abstract
Converging evidence suggests that economic values are rescaled as a function of the range of the available options. Critically, although locally adaptive, range adaptation has been shown to lead to suboptimal choices. This is particularly striking in reinforcement learning (RL) situations when options are extrapolated from their original context. Range adaptation can be seen as the result of an adaptive coding process aiming at increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. However, this hypothesis leads to a counter-intuitive prediction: decreasing outcome uncertainty should increase range adaptation and, consequently, extrapolation errors. Here, we tested the paradoxical relation between range adaptation and performance in a large sample of subjects performing variants of a RL task, where we manipulated task difficulty. Results confirmed that range adaptation induces systematic extrapolation errors and is stronger when decreasing outcome uncertainty. Finally, we propose a range-adapting model and show that it is able to parsimoniously capture all the observed results.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The Cost of Appearing Suspicious? Information Gathering in Trust Decisions 95%
- Spontaneous eye blink rate predicts individual differences in exploration and exploitation during reinforcement learning 95%
- Implicit and explicit learning of Bayesian priors differently impacts bias during perceptual decision-making 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Asymmetric learning and adaptability to changes in relational structure during transitive inference 97%
- Cognitive Computational Model Reveals Repetition Bias in a Sequential Decision-Making Task 97%
- The Temporal Dynamics of Metacognitive Experiences Track Rational Adaptations in Task Performance 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.