不要让鸽子主持招聘委员会:鸽子(Columba livia)与人类(Homo sapiens)在秘书问题上的次优方法相匹配。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Journal of Comparative Psychology Pub Date : 2022-02-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-22 DOI:10.1037/com0000304
Walter T Herbranson, Hunter Pluckebaum, Jaidyanne Podsobinski, Zachary Hartzell
{"title":"不要让鸽子主持招聘委员会:鸽子(Columba livia)与人类(Homo sapiens)在秘书问题上的次优方法相匹配。","authors":"Walter T Herbranson,&nbsp;Hunter Pluckebaum,&nbsp;Jaidyanne Podsobinski,&nbsp;Zachary Hartzell","doi":"10.1037/com0000304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The secretary problem is a notorious mathematical puzzle in which one attempts to hire the best available candidate from a pool of known size. Under specific constraints, the problem has an ideal solution, but it is difficult for humans to solve. In particular, humans generally consider too few options from the available pool and in doing so make inferior hires. Three experiments investigated pigeons' and humans' choices on a version of the secretary problem. Pigeons performed suboptimally by choosing too soon, but suffered only limited costs to their rate of earned reinforcement. Depending on the instruction set, human participants approximated either prior suboptimal human results or current pigeons' results. These results may provide some insight into what makes the problem difficult to solve and how the secretary problem connects with decisions in the real world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":54861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","volume":"136 1","pages":"3-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Don't let the pigeon chair the search committee: Pigeons (Columba livia) match humans' (Homo sapiens) suboptimal approach to the secretary problem.\",\"authors\":\"Walter T Herbranson,&nbsp;Hunter Pluckebaum,&nbsp;Jaidyanne Podsobinski,&nbsp;Zachary Hartzell\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/com0000304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The secretary problem is a notorious mathematical puzzle in which one attempts to hire the best available candidate from a pool of known size. Under specific constraints, the problem has an ideal solution, but it is difficult for humans to solve. In particular, humans generally consider too few options from the available pool and in doing so make inferior hires. Three experiments investigated pigeons' and humans' choices on a version of the secretary problem. Pigeons performed suboptimally by choosing too soon, but suffered only limited costs to their rate of earned reinforcement. Depending on the instruction set, human participants approximated either prior suboptimal human results or current pigeons' results. These results may provide some insight into what makes the problem difficult to solve and how the secretary problem connects with decisions in the real world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"volume\":\"136 1\",\"pages\":\"3-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000304\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

秘书问题是一个臭名昭著的数学难题,在这个问题中,人们试图从一个已知规模的人才库中雇佣最优秀的候选人。在特定的约束条件下,问题有理想的解决方案,但人类很难解决。特别是,人们通常会从可用的资源池中考虑太少的选择,从而做出不合格的雇佣。三个实验调查了鸽子和人类在秘书问题上的选择。鸽子的表现不是最优的,因为它们选择得太快了,但它们只付出了有限的代价来获得强化。根据指令集的不同,人类参与者要么近似于先前的次优人类结果,要么近似于当前鸽子的结果。这些结果可能会让我们深入了解是什么让这个问题难以解决,以及秘书问题与现实世界中的决策有何联系。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Don't let the pigeon chair the search committee: Pigeons (Columba livia) match humans' (Homo sapiens) suboptimal approach to the secretary problem.

The secretary problem is a notorious mathematical puzzle in which one attempts to hire the best available candidate from a pool of known size. Under specific constraints, the problem has an ideal solution, but it is difficult for humans to solve. In particular, humans generally consider too few options from the available pool and in doing so make inferior hires. Three experiments investigated pigeons' and humans' choices on a version of the secretary problem. Pigeons performed suboptimally by choosing too soon, but suffered only limited costs to their rate of earned reinforcement. Depending on the instruction set, human participants approximated either prior suboptimal human results or current pigeons' results. These results may provide some insight into what makes the problem difficult to solve and how the secretary problem connects with decisions in the real world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

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
3.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Comparative Psychology publishes original research from a comparative perspective on the behavior, cognition, perception, and social relationships of diverse species.
×
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