跨期和风险选择中的模糊偏好:一项使用漂移-扩散模型的大规模研究。

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Mingqian Guo, Iris Ikink, Karin Roelofs, Bernd Figner
{"title":"跨期和风险选择中的模糊偏好:一项使用漂移-扩散模型的大规模研究。","authors":"Mingqian Guo, Iris Ikink, Karin Roelofs, Bernd Figner","doi":"10.3758/s13423-025-02709-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intertemporal choices constitute a significant topic of interest in both psychological and behavioral-economics research. While many studies focus on decisions with precisely known reward delivery times, real-world situations typically involve only an imprecise knowledge of these timings (i.e., the delivery times are ambiguous). The current study uses a large size dataset (sample size N > 669) consisting of both risky and intertemporal ambiguous and nonambiguous choices and aims (i) to clarify the relationship between probability-ambiguity and time-ambiguity effects on choice, and (ii) to evaluate different computational models (attribute-wise and integrated-value models) across risky and intertemporal choice domains using a drift-diffusion model (DDM) framework. Analysis of the choice data revealed a significant association: Individuals who were more averse to time ambiguity also exhibited a stronger aversion to probability ambiguity, as indicated by a correlation of r = .28. The DDM analyses revealed that (i) DDMs incorporating ambiguity preferences outperformed models without ambiguity preferences in both the time and probability domain for most participants. Interestingly, (ii) while time-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an attribute-wise model, probability-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an integrated-value model. Finally, we found that (iii) if an individual's intertemporal decisions were best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity, then their risky decisions were also most likely best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity.Taken together, our results are evidence that ambiguity preferences across the time and probability domains are not independent but show some consistency despite the differing-attribute-wise versus integrated-value-decision strategies in each domain.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ambiguity preferences in intertemporal and risky choice: A large-scale study using drift-diffusion modelling.\",\"authors\":\"Mingqian Guo, Iris Ikink, Karin Roelofs, Bernd Figner\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13423-025-02709-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Intertemporal choices constitute a significant topic of interest in both psychological and behavioral-economics research. While many studies focus on decisions with precisely known reward delivery times, real-world situations typically involve only an imprecise knowledge of these timings (i.e., the delivery times are ambiguous). The current study uses a large size dataset (sample size N > 669) consisting of both risky and intertemporal ambiguous and nonambiguous choices and aims (i) to clarify the relationship between probability-ambiguity and time-ambiguity effects on choice, and (ii) to evaluate different computational models (attribute-wise and integrated-value models) across risky and intertemporal choice domains using a drift-diffusion model (DDM) framework. Analysis of the choice data revealed a significant association: Individuals who were more averse to time ambiguity also exhibited a stronger aversion to probability ambiguity, as indicated by a correlation of r = .28. The DDM analyses revealed that (i) DDMs incorporating ambiguity preferences outperformed models without ambiguity preferences in both the time and probability domain for most participants. Interestingly, (ii) while time-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an attribute-wise model, probability-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an integrated-value model. Finally, we found that (iii) if an individual's intertemporal decisions were best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity, then their risky decisions were also most likely best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity.Taken together, our results are evidence that ambiguity preferences across the time and probability domains are not independent but show some consistency despite the differing-attribute-wise versus integrated-value-decision strategies in each domain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02709-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-025-02709-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

跨期选择在心理学和行为经济学研究中都是一个重要的话题。虽然许多研究关注的是具有精确已知奖励交付时间的决策,但现实世界的情况通常只涉及这些时间的不精确知识(即,交付时间是模糊的)。目前的研究使用了一个大数据集(样本量为669),包括风险和跨期模糊和非模糊选择,目的是(i)澄清概率模糊和时间模糊对选择的影响之间的关系,(ii)使用漂移-扩散模型(DDM)框架评估风险和跨期选择领域的不同计算模型(属性智能和集成值模型)。对选择数据的分析揭示了一个显著的关联:更厌恶时间模糊的个体也表现出更强烈的厌恶概率模糊,相关系数为r = 0.28。DDM分析表明:(1)对于大多数参与者来说,包含模糊偏好的DDM在时间域和概率域上都优于不包含模糊偏好的DDM。有趣的是,(ii)虽然时间模糊性厌恶最适合用属性模型来解释,但概率模糊性厌恶最适合用综合价值模型来解释。最后,我们发现(iii)如果一个个体的跨期决策可以用包含歧义的DDM来最好地解释,那么他们的风险决策也很可能是包含歧义的DDM来最好地解释。综上所述,我们的研究结果证明,尽管每个领域的不同属性与综合价值决策策略不同,但跨时间和概率域的模糊偏好并不是独立的,而是显示出一定的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ambiguity preferences in intertemporal and risky choice: A large-scale study using drift-diffusion modelling.

Intertemporal choices constitute a significant topic of interest in both psychological and behavioral-economics research. While many studies focus on decisions with precisely known reward delivery times, real-world situations typically involve only an imprecise knowledge of these timings (i.e., the delivery times are ambiguous). The current study uses a large size dataset (sample size N > 669) consisting of both risky and intertemporal ambiguous and nonambiguous choices and aims (i) to clarify the relationship between probability-ambiguity and time-ambiguity effects on choice, and (ii) to evaluate different computational models (attribute-wise and integrated-value models) across risky and intertemporal choice domains using a drift-diffusion model (DDM) framework. Analysis of the choice data revealed a significant association: Individuals who were more averse to time ambiguity also exhibited a stronger aversion to probability ambiguity, as indicated by a correlation of r = .28. The DDM analyses revealed that (i) DDMs incorporating ambiguity preferences outperformed models without ambiguity preferences in both the time and probability domain for most participants. Interestingly, (ii) while time-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an attribute-wise model, probability-ambiguity aversion was best explained by an integrated-value model. Finally, we found that (iii) if an individual's intertemporal decisions were best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity, then their risky decisions were also most likely best explained by a DDM incorporating ambiguity.Taken together, our results are evidence that ambiguity preferences across the time and probability domains are not independent but show some consistency despite the differing-attribute-wise versus integrated-value-decision strategies in each domain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信