IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1006964.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Autistic traits influence the strategic diversity of information sampling: Insights from two-stage decision models

Author

Listed:
  • Haoyang Lu
  • Li Yi
  • Hang Zhang

Abstract

Information sampling can reduce uncertainty in future decisions but is often costly. To maximize reward, people need to balance sampling cost and information gain. Here we aimed to understand how autistic traits influence the optimality of information sampling and to identify the particularly affected cognitive processes. Healthy human adults with different levels of autistic traits performed a probabilistic inference task, where they could sequentially sample information to increase their likelihood of correct inference and may choose to stop at any moment. We manipulated the cost and evidence associated with each sample and compared participants’ performance to strategies that maximize expected gain. We found that participants were overall close to optimal but also showed autistic-trait-related differences. Participants with higher autistic traits had a higher efficiency of winning rewards when the sampling cost was zero but a lower efficiency when the cost was high and the evidence was more ambiguous. Computational modeling of participants’ sampling choices and decision times revealed a two-stage decision process, with the second stage being an optional second thought. Participants may consider cost in the first stage and evidence in the second stage, or in the reverse order. The probability of choosing to stop sampling at a specific stage increases with increasing cost or increasing evidence. Surprisingly, autistic traits did not influence the decision in either stage. However, participants with higher autistic traits inclined to consider cost first, while those with lower autistic traits considered cost or evidence first in a more balanced way. This would lead to the observed autistic-trait-related advantages or disadvantages in sampling optimality, depending on whether the optimal sampling strategy is determined only by cost or jointly by cost and evidence.Author summary: Children with autism can spend hours practicing lining up toys or learning all about cars or lighthouses. This kind of behaviors, we think, may reflect suboptimal information sampling strategies, that is, a failure to balance the gain of information with the cost (time, energy, or money) of information sampling. We hypothesized that suboptimal information sampling is a general characteristic of people with autism or high level of autistic traits. In our experiment, we tested how participants may adjust their sampling strategies with the change of sampling cost and information gain in the environment. Though all participants were healthy young adults who had similar IQs, higher autistic traits were associated with higher or lower efficiency of winning rewards under different conditions. Counterintuitively, participants with different levels of autistic traits did not differ in the general tendency of oversampling or undersampling, or in the decision they would reach when a specific set of sampling cost or information gain was considered. Instead, participants with higher autistic traits consistently considered sampling cost first and only weighed information gain during a second thought, while those with lower autistic traits had more diverse sampling strategies that consequently better balanced sampling cost and information gain.

Suggested Citation

  • Haoyang Lu & Li Yi & Hang Zhang, 2019. "Autistic traits influence the strategic diversity of information sampling: Insights from two-stage decision models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-29, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1006964
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006964
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006964
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006964&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006964?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. Daniel Bennett & Stefan Bode & Maja Brydevall & Hayley Warren & Carsten Murawski, 2016. "Intrinsic Valuation of Information in Decision Making under Uncertainty," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Halekoh, Ulrich & Højsgaard, Søren, 2014. "A Kenward-Roger Approximation and Parametric Bootstrap Methods for Tests in Linear Mixed Models The R Package pbkrtest," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 59(i09).
    3. Cavanaugh, Joseph E., 1997. "Unifying the derivations for the Akaike and corrected Akaike information criteria," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 201-208, April.
    4. Frederic M. Stoll & Vincent Fontanier & Emmanuel Procyk, 2016. "Specific frontal neural dynamics contribute to decisions to check," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. George D. Farmer & Paula Smith & Simon Baron-Cohen & William J. Skylark, 2021. "The effect of autism on information sampling during decision-making: An eye-tracking study," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(3), pages 614-637, May.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:3:p:614-637 is not listed 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. Carlos A. Medel, 2015. "Probabilidad Clásica de Sobreajuste con Criterios de Información: Estimaciones con Series Macroeconómicas Chilenas," Revista de Analisis Economico – Economic Analysis Review, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business, vol. 30(1), pages 57-72, Abril.
    2. Paul E. Rose & James E. Brereton & Lewis J. Rowden & Ricardo Lemos Figueiredo & Lisa M. Riley, 2019. "What’s new from the zoo? An analysis of ten years of zoo-themed research output," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Jed Armstrong & Özer Karagedikli, 2017. "The role of non-participants in labour market dynamics," Reserve Bank of New Zealand Analytical Notes series AN2017/01, Reserve Bank of New Zealand.
    4. Giuseppe Brandi & Ruggero Gramatica & Tiziana Di Matteo, 2019. "Unveil stock correlation via a new tensor-based decomposition method," Papers 1911.06126, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2020.
    5. Detering, Nils & Packham, Natalie, 2018. "Model risk of contingent claims," IRTG 1792 Discussion Papers 2018-036, Humboldt University of Berlin, International Research Training Group 1792 "High Dimensional Nonstationary Time Series".
    6. Byron C. Jaeger & Lloyd J. Edwards & Kalyan Das & Pranab K. Sen, 2017. "An statistic for fixed effects in the generalized linear mixed model," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 1086-1105, April.
    7. Thi Mai Hoa Ha & Derrick Yong & Elizabeth Mei Yin Lee & Prathab Kumar & Yuan Kun Lee & Weibiao Zhou, 2017. "Activation and inactivation of Bacillus pumilus spores by kiloelectron volt X-ray irradiation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Yong Li & Zhou Wu & Jun Yu & Tao Zeng, 2024. "A Note on AIC and TIC for Model Selection," Working Papers 202420, University of Macau, Faculty of Business Administration.
    9. King, K.W. & Hanrahan, B.R. & Stinner, J. & Shedekar, V.S., 2022. "Field scale discharge and water quality response, to drainage water management," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    10. Bengtsson, Thomas & Cavanaugh, Joseph E., 2006. "An improved Akaike information criterion for state-space model selection," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(10), pages 2635-2654, June.
    11. Shahrestani, Parnia & Rafei, Meysam, 2020. "The impact of oil price shocks on Tehran Stock Exchange returns: Application of the Markov switching vector autoregressive models," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    12. Jan Grohn & Nima Khalighinejad & Caroline I Jahn & Alessandro Bongioanni & Urs Schüffelgen & Jerome Sallet & Matthew F. S. Rushworth & Nils Kolling, 2024. "General mechanisms of task engagement in the primate frontal cortex," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Farid Shirazi & Nick Hajli, 2021. "IT-Enabled Sustainable Innovation and the Global Digital Divides," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, August.
    14. Govaerts, B. & Francq, B. & Marion, R. & Martin, M. & Thiel, M., 2020. "The essentials on linear regression, ANOVA, general linear and linear mixed models for the chemist," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2020012, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    15. Marhuenda, Yolanda & Morales, Domingo & del Carmen Pardo, María, 2014. "Information criteria for Fay–Herriot model selection," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 268-280.
    16. James Simpson & Megan Freeth & Kimberley Jayne Simpson & Kevin Thwaites, 2022. "Street edge subdivision: Structuring ground floor interfaces to stimulate pedestrian visual engagement," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(6), pages 1775-1791, July.
    17. Isaac Fradkin & Casimir Ludwig & Eran Eldar & Jonathan D Huppert, 2020. "Doubting what you already know: Uncertainty regarding state transitions is associated with obsessive compulsive symptoms," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-26, February.
    18. Fábio Bayer & Francisco Cribari-Neto, 2015. "Bootstrap-based model selection criteria for beta regressions," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 24(4), pages 776-795, December.
    19. Hojin Moon & Hyun‐Joo Kim & James J. Chen & Ralph L. Kodell, 2005. "Model Averaging Using the Kullback Information Criterion in Estimating Effective Doses for Microbial Infection and Illness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1147-1159, October.
    20. Ng, Serena, 2013. "Variable Selection in Predictive Regressions," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 752-789, Elsevier.

    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:pcbi00:1006964. 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.