Towards Choice Engineering
Dan, O.; Plonsky, O.; Loewenstein, Y.
Show abstract
Effectively shaping human and animal behavior has been of great practical and theoretical importance for millennia. Here we ask whether quantitative models of choice can be used to achieve this goal more effectively than qualitative psychological principles. We term this approach, which is motivated by the effectiveness of engineering in the natural sciences, choice engineering. To address this question, we launched an academic competition, in which the academic participants were instructed to use either quantitative models or qualitative principles to design reward schedules that maximally bias choice in a repeated, two-alternative task. We found that a choice engineering approach was the most successful method for shaping behavior in our task. This is a proof of concept that quantitative models are ripe to be used in order to engineer behavior. Finally, we show that choice engineering can be effectively used to compare models in the cognitive sciences, thus providing an alternative to the standard statistical methods of model comparison that are based on likelihood or explained variance.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Dynamic integration of forward planning and heuristic preferences during multiple goal pursuit 97%
- Joint modeling of choices and reaction times based on Bayesian contextual behavioral control 97%
- A nonlinear relationship between prediction errors and learning rates in human reinforcement learning 96%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.