IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1003759.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bursts and Heavy Tails in Temporal and Sequential Dynamics of Foraging Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Kanghoon Jung
  • Hyeran Jang
  • Jerald D Kralik
  • Jaeseung Jeong

Abstract

A fundamental understanding of behavior requires predicting when and what an individual will choose. However, the actual temporal and sequential dynamics of successive choices made among multiple alternatives remain unclear. In the current study, we tested the hypothesis that there is a general bursting property in both the timing and sequential patterns of foraging decisions. We conducted a foraging experiment in which rats chose among four different foods over a continuous two-week time period. Regarding when choices were made, we found bursts of rapidly occurring actions, separated by time-varying inactive periods, partially based on a circadian rhythm. Regarding what was chosen, we found sequential dynamics in affective choices characterized by two key features: (a) a highly biased choice distribution; and (b) preferential attachment, in which the animals were more likely to choose what they had previously chosen. To capture the temporal dynamics, we propose a dual-state model consisting of active and inactive states. We also introduce a satiation-attainment process for bursty activity, and a non-homogeneous Poisson process for longer inactivity between bursts. For the sequential dynamics, we propose a dual-control model consisting of goal-directed and habit systems, based on outcome valuation and choice history, respectively. This study provides insights into how the bursty nature of behavior emerges from the interaction of different underlying systems, leading to heavy tails in the distribution of behavior over time and choices.Author Summary: To understand spontaneous animal behavior, two key elements must be explained: when an action is made and what is chosen. Here, we conducted a foraging experiment in which rats chose among four different foods over a continuous two-week time period. With respect to when, we found bursts of rapidly occurring responses separated by long inactive periods. With respect to what, we found biased choice behavior toward the favorite items as well as repetitive behavior, reflecting goal-directed and habitual responding, respectively. We account for the when and what components with two distinct computational mechanisms, each composed of two processes: (a) active and inactive states for the temporal dynamics, and (b) goal-directed and habitual control for the sequential dynamics. This study provides behavioral and computational insights into the dynamical properties of decision-making that determine both when an animal will act and what the animal will choose. Our findings provide an integrated framework for describing the temporal and sequential structure of everyday choices among, for example, food, music, books, brands, web-browsing and social interaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanghoon Jung & Hyeran Jang & Jerald D Kralik & Jaeseung Jeong, 2014. "Bursts and Heavy Tails in Temporal and Sequential Dynamics of Foraging Decisions," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003759
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003759
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003759&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003759?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amir Dezfouli & Bernard W Balleine, 2013. "Actions, Action Sequences and Habits: Evidence That Goal-Directed and Habitual Action Control Are Hierarchically Organized," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-14, December.
    2. C. Anteneodo & R. D. Malmgren & D. R. Chialvo, 2010. "Poissonian bursts in e-mail correspondence," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 75(3), pages 389-394, June.
    3. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
    4. Harder, Uli & Paczuski, Maya, 2006. "Correlated dynamics in human printing behavior," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 361(1), pages 329-336.
    5. Jinhong Kim & Deokjae Lee & Byungnam Kahng, 2013. "Microscopic Modelling Circadian and Bursty Pattern of Human Activities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-7, March.
    6. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    7. Márton Karsai & Kimmo Kaski & János Kertész, 2012. "Correlated Dynamics in Egocentric Communication Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-9, July.
    8. Reynolds, A.M., 2011. "On the origin of bursts and heavy tails in animal dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(2), pages 245-249.
    9. 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.
    10. Yutaka Sakai & Tomoki Fukai, 2008. "When Does Reward Maximization Lead to Matching Law?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(11), pages 1-7, November.
    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. Phanish Puranam & Murali Swamy, 2016. "How Initial Representations Shape Coupled Learning Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 323-335, April.
    2. Daniel E Acuña & Paul Schrater, 2010. "Structure Learning in Human Sequential Decision-Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Alina Ferecatu & Arnaud De Bruyn, 2022. "Understanding Managers’ Trade-Offs Between Exploration and Exploitation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 139-165, January.
    4. Noah Gans & George Knox & Rachel Croson, 2007. "Simple Models of Discrete Choice and Their Performance in Bandit Experiments," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 383-408, December.
    5. Iftekhar, M. S. & Tisdell, J. G., 2018. "Learning in repeated multiple unit combinatorial auctions: An experimental study," Working Papers 267301, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Ianni, A., 2002. "Reinforcement learning and the power law of practice: some analytical results," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 203, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    7. Benaïm, Michel & Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2009. "Learning in games with unstable equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1694-1709, July.
    8. Erhao Xie, 2019. "Monetary Payoff and Utility Function in Adaptive Learning Models," Staff Working Papers 19-50, Bank of Canada.
    9. Sergiu Hart & Andreu Mas-Colell, 2013. "A Simple Adaptive Procedure Leading To Correlated Equilibrium," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Simple Adaptive Strategies From Regret-Matching to Uncoupled Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 17-46, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. 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.
    11. Mariano Runco, 2013. "Estimating depth of reasoning in a repeated guessing game with no feedback," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 402-413, September.
    12. Osili, Una Okonkwo & Paulson, Anna, 2014. "Crises and confidence: Systemic banking crises and depositor behavior," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 646-660.
    13. Wei Chen & Shu-Yu Liu & Chih-Han Chen & Yi-Shan Lee, 2011. "Bounded Memory, Inertia, Sampling and Weighting Model for Market Entry Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, March.
    14. Marchiori, Davide & Di Guida, Sibilla & Polonio, Luca, 2021. "Plasticity of strategic sophistication in interactive decision-making," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    15. Cason, Timothy N. & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Yamato, Takehiko & Yokotani, Konomu, 2004. "Non-excludable public good experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 81-102, October.
    16. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Alan Kirman & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2016. "Counter Intuitive Learning: An Exploratory Study," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2016-12, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    17. Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt, 2001. "Ten Little Treasures of Game Theory and Ten Intuitive Contradictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1402-1422, December.
    18. Breitmoser, Yves, 2019. "Knowing me, imagining you: Projection and overbidding in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 423-447.
    19. Andreas Nicklisch, 2011. "Learning strategic environments: an experimental study of strategy formation and transfer," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 539-558, October.
    20. Backhaus, Teresa & Huck, Steffen & Leutgeb, Johannes & Oprea, Ryan, 2023. "Learning through period and physical time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 21-29.

    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:plo:pcbi00:1003759. 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: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    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.