IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v11y2020i1d10.1038_s41467-020-16964-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biased belief updating and suboptimal choice in foraging decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Neil Garrett

    (Princeton University
    University of Oxford, Woodstock Rd)

  • Nathaniel D. Daw

    (Princeton University)

Abstract

Deciding which options to engage, and which to forego, requires developing accurate beliefs about the overall distribution of prospects. Here we adapt a classic prey selection task from foraging theory to examine how individuals keep track of an environment’s reward rate and adjust choices in response to its fluctuations. Preference shifts were most pronounced when the environment improved compared to when it deteriorated. This is best explained by a trial-by-trial learning model in which participants estimate the reward rate with upward vs. downward changes controlled by separate learning rates. A failure to adjust expectations sufficiently when an environment becomes worse leads to suboptimal choices: options that are valuable given the environmental conditions are rejected in the false expectation that better options will materialize. These findings offer a previously unappreciated parallel in the serial choice setting of observations of asymmetric updating and resulting biased (often overoptimistic) estimates in other domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Neil Garrett & Nathaniel D. Daw, 2020. "Biased belief updating and suboptimal choice in foraging decisions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-16964-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-16964-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16964-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-020-16964-5?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Angela M. Ianni & Daniel P. Eisenberg & Erie D. Boorman & Sara M. Constantino & Catherine E. Hegarty & Michael D. Gregory & Joseph C. Masdeu & Philip D. Kohn & Timothy E. Behrens & Karen F. Berman, 2023. "PET-measured human dopamine synthesis capacity and receptor availability predict trading rewards and time-costs during foraging," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nat:natcom:v:11:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-020-16964-5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.nature.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.