Exploration versus exploitation: A laboratory test of the single-agent exponential bandit model

IF 1.7 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Stanton Hudja, Daniel Woods
{"title":"Exploration versus exploitation: A laboratory test of the single-agent exponential bandit model","authors":"Stanton Hudja,&nbsp;Daniel Woods","doi":"10.1111/ecin.13164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper analyzes how individuals resolve an exploration versus exploitation trade-off in a laboratory experiment. The experiment implements the single-agent exponential bandit model. We analyze how subjects respond to changes in the prior belief, safe action, and discount factor. We find that subjects respond in the predicted direction to these changes. However, we find that subjects under-respond to the prior belief, under-respond to the safe action, and typically explore less than predicted. Our results suggest that neither risk aversion nor the random termination probability are driving under-experimentation. Our results are consistent with subjects having incorrect beliefs about exploration.</p>","PeriodicalId":51380,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ecin.13164","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecin.13164","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper analyzes how individuals resolve an exploration versus exploitation trade-off in a laboratory experiment. The experiment implements the single-agent exponential bandit model. We analyze how subjects respond to changes in the prior belief, safe action, and discount factor. We find that subjects respond in the predicted direction to these changes. However, we find that subjects under-respond to the prior belief, under-respond to the safe action, and typically explore less than predicted. Our results suggest that neither risk aversion nor the random termination probability are driving under-experimentation. Our results are consistent with subjects having incorrect beliefs about exploration.

Abstract Image

探索与开发:单一代理指数强盗模型的实验室测试
本文分析了个体如何在实验室实验中解决探索与开发之间的权衡问题。该实验实现了单代理指数强盗模型。我们分析了受试者如何对先验信念、安全行动和贴现因子的变化做出反应。我们发现,被试对这些变化的反应与预测的方向一致。然而,我们发现受试者对先验信念的反应不足,对安全行动的反应不足,而且通常探索的程度低于预测。我们的结果表明,风险规避和随机终止概率都不是导致实验不足的原因。我们的结果与受试者关于探索的错误信念是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Economic Inquiry
Economic Inquiry ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Published since 1962, (formerly Western Economic Journal), EI is widely regarded as one of the top scholarly journals in its field. Besides containing research on all economics topic areas, a principal objective is to make each article understandable to economists who are not necessarily specialists in the article topic area. Nine Nobel laureates are among EI long list of prestigious authors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信