IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/compec/v63y2024i5d10.1007_s10614-023-10388-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing Human Search Behavior When Subjective Returns are Unobservable

Author

Listed:
  • Shinji Nakazato

    (Tokyo University of Science)

  • Bojian Yang

    (Tokyo University of Science)

  • Tetsuya Shimokawa

    (Tokyo University of Science)

Abstract

The exploration versus exploitation dilemma is a critical issue in human information acquisition and sequential belief formation, and the multi-armed bandit problem has been widely used to address it. Because of its high descriptive accuracy, the SGU model, which combines SoftMax type probabilistic selection, Gaussian process regression type belief updating, and upper confidence interval type evaluation, has attracted much attention. However, this model assumes that the analyst has access to the returns from people’s choices, but in many realistic tasks, this assumption cannot be made because only choices are observable. Moreover, many of the returns are subjective. The authors introduce a new model-fitting method that overcomes this barrier and evaluates its performance using data sets derived from agent-based simulations and real consumer data. This approach has the potential to significantly broaden the range of issues to which the SGU model can be applied.

Suggested Citation

  • Shinji Nakazato & Bojian Yang & Tetsuya Shimokawa, 2024. "Analyzing Human Search Behavior When Subjective Returns are Unobservable," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 63(5), pages 1921-1947, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:compec:v:63:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10614-023-10388-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10614-023-10388-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10614-023-10388-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10614-023-10388-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Momchil S. Tomov & Van Q. Truong & Rohan A. Hundia & Samuel J. Gershman, 2020. "Dissociable neural correlates of uncertainty underlie different exploration strategies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1995. "Case-Based Decision Theory," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 605-639.
    3. Gilboa,Itzhak & Schmeidler,David, 2001. "A Theory of Case-Based Decisions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521802345, September.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    5. Nathaniel D. Daw & John P. O'Doherty & Peter Dayan & Ben Seymour & Raymond J. Dolan, 2006. "Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 441(7095), pages 876-879, June.
    6. Bruno B Averbeck, 2015. "Theory of Choice in Bandit, Information Sampling and Foraging Tasks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-28, March.
    7. Charley M. Wu & Eric Schulz & Maarten Speekenbrink & Jonathan D. Nelson & Björn Meder, 2018. "Generalization guides human exploration in vast decision spaces," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(12), pages 915-924, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marco LiCalzi & Roland Mühlenbernd, 2022. "Feature-weighted categorized play across symmetric games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1052-1078, June.
    2. David M. Frankel, 2008. "Adaptive Expectations And Stock Market Crashes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(2), pages 595-619, May.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2011. "Opinion Dynamics and Learning in Social Networks," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 3-49, March.
    4. Benjamin Radoc, 2020. "Bandit with similarity information," Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University, Working Paper Series 202002, Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University.
    5. Gary Charness & Dan Levin, 2003. "Bayesian Updating vs. Reinforcement and Affect: A Laboratory Study," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000180, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Brit Grosskopf & Rajiv Sarin & Elizabeth Watson, 2015. "An experiment on case-based decision making," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 639-666, December.
    7. Francesco Cerigioni, 2021. "Dual Decision Processes: Retrieving Preferences When Some Choices Are Automatic," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1667-1704.
    8. Gary Charness & Dan Levin, 2005. "When Optimal Choices Feel Wrong: A Laboratory Study of Bayesian Updating, Complexity, and Affect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1300-1309, September.
    9. Jehiel, Philippe & Singh, Juni, 2021. "Multi-state choices with aggregate feedback on unfamiliar alternatives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-24.
    10. Mauersberger, Felix, 2019. "Thompson Sampling: Endogenously Random Behavior in Games and Markets," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203600, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Hensher, David A. & Puckett, Sean M. & Rose, John M., 2007. "Agency decision making in freight distribution chains: Establishing a parsimonious empirical framework from alternative behavioural structures," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 924-949, November.
    12. Agastya, Murali & Slinko, Arkadii, 2015. "Dynamic choice in a complex world," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 232-258.
    13. Gilboa, Itzhak & Samuelson, Larry & Schmeidler, David, 2013. "Dynamics of inductive inference in a unified framework," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1399-1432.
    14. Bleile, Jörg, 2016. "Limited Attention in Case-Based Belief Formation," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 518, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    15. Grechuk, Bogdan & Zabarankin, Michael, 2018. "Direct data-based decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 200-211.
    16. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Dirk Wilmsmann & Benedikt Niemann, 2013. "Experimental evidence on case-based decision theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 211-232, August.
    17. Anna P. Giron & Simon Ciranka & Eric Schulz & Wouter Bos & Azzurra Ruggeri & Björn Meder & Charley M. Wu, 2023. "Developmental changes in exploration resemble stochastic optimization," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(11), pages 1955-1967, November.
    18. O’Callaghan, Patrick, 2011. "Context and Decision: Utility on a Union of Mixture Spaces," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 973, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    19. R Becket Ebitz & Brianna J Sleezer & Hank P Jedema & Charles W Bradberry & Benjamin Y Hayden, 2019. "Tonic exploration governs both flexibility and lapses," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-37, November.
    20. Yasuo Sasaki & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Esa Saarinen, 2015. "Modeling Systems of Holding Back as Hypergames and their Connections with Systems Intelligence," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(6), pages 593-602, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:compec:v:63:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10614-023-10388-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.