Risk attitude and belief updating: theory and experiment
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Huang E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10771331 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:People tend to update beliefs about their future outcomes in a valence-dependent way: they are likely to incorporate good news and to neglect bad news. However, belief formation is a complex process which depends not only on motivational factors such as the desire for favorable conclusions, but also on multiple cognitive variables such as prior beliefs, knowledge about personal vulnerabilities and resources, and the size of the probabilities and estimation errors. Thus, we applied computational modeling in order to test for valence-induced biases in updating while formally controlling for relevant cognitive factors. We compared biased and unbiased Bayesian models of belief updating, and specified alternative models based on reinforcement learning. The experiment consisted of 80 trials with 80 different adverse future life events. In each trial, participants estimated the base rate of one of these events and estimated their own risk of experiencing the event before and after being confronted with the actual base rate. Belief updates corresponded to the difference between the two self-risk estimates. Valence-dependent updating was assessed by comparing trials with good news (better-than-expected base rates) with trials with bad news (worse-than-expected base rates). After receiving bad relative to good news, participants' updates were smaller and deviated more strongly from rational Bayesian predictions, indicating a valence-induced bias. Model comparison revealed that the biased (i.e., optimistic) Bayesian model of belief updating better accounted for data than the unbiased (i.e., rational) Bayesian model, confirming that the valence of the new information influenced the amount of updating. Moreover, alternative computational modeling based on reinforcement learning demonstrated higher learning rates for good than for bad news, as well as a moderating role of personal knowledge. Finally, in this specific experimental context, the approach based on reinforcement learning was superior to the Bayesian approach. The computational validation of valence-dependent belief updating represents a novel support for a genuine optimism bias in human belief formation. Moreover, the precise control of relevant cognitive variables justifies the conclusion that the motivation to adopt the most favorable self-referential conclusions biases human judgments.
| S-EPMC5489622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We propose a framework for general Bayesian inference. We argue that a valid update of a prior belief distribution to a posterior can be made for parameters which are connected to observations through a loss function rather than the traditional likelihood function, which is recovered as a special case. Modern application areas make it increasingly challenging for Bayesians to attempt to model the true data-generating mechanism. For instance, when the object of interest is low dimensional, such as a mean or median, it is cumbersome to have to achieve this via a complete model for the whole data distribution. More importantly, there are settings where the parameter of interest does not directly index a family of density functions and thus the Bayesian approach to learning about such parameters is currently regarded as problematic. Our framework uses loss functions to connect information in the data to functionals of interest. The updating of beliefs then follows from a decision theoretic approach involving cumulative loss functions. Importantly, the procedure coincides with Bayesian updating when a true likelihood is known yet provides coherent subjective inference in much more general settings. Connections to other inference frameworks are highlighted.
| S-EPMC5082587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and hypothesisCurrent frameworks propose that delusions result from aberrant belief updating due to altered prediction error (PE) signaling and misestimation of environmental volatility. We aimed to investigate whether behavioral and neural signatures of belief updating are specifically related to the presence of delusions or generally associated with manifest schizophrenia.MethodsOur cross-sectional design includes human participants (n[female/male] = 66[25/41]), stratified into four groups: healthy participants with minimal (n = 22) or strong delusional-like ideation (n = 18), and participants with diagnosed schizophrenia with minimal (n = 13) or strong delusions (n = 13), resulting in a 2 × 2 design, which allows to test for the effects of delusion and diagnosis. Participants performed a reversal learning task with stable and volatile task contingencies during fMRI scanning. We formalized learning with a hierarchical Gaussian filter model and conducted model-based fMRI analysis regarding beliefs of outcome uncertainty and volatility, precision-weighted PEs of the outcome- and the volatility-belief.ResultsPatients with schizophrenia as compared to healthy controls showed lower accuracy and heightened choice switching, while delusional ideation did not affect these measures. Participants with delusions showed increased precision-weighted PE-related neural activation in fronto-striatal regions. People with diagnosed schizophrenia overestimated environmental volatility and showed an attenuated neural representation of volatility in the anterior insula, medial frontal and angular gyrus.ConclusionsDelusional beliefs are associated with altered striatal PE-signals. Juxtaposing, the potentially unsettling belief that the environment is constantly changing and weaker neural encoding of this subjective volatility seems to be associated with manifest schizophrenia, but not with the presence of delusional ideation.
| S-EPMC11207849 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Individuals prone to anxiety and depression often report beliefs and make judgements about themselves that are more negative than those reported by others. We use computational modeling of a richly naturalistic task to disentangle the role of negative priors versus negatively biased belief updating and to investigate their association with different dimensions of Internalizing psychopathology. Undergraduate participants first provided profiles for a hypothetical tech internship. They then viewed pairs of other profiles and selected the individual they would prefer to work alongside out of each pair. In a subsequent phase of the experiment, participants made judgments about their relative popularity as hypothetical internship partners both before any feedback and after each of 20 items of feedback revealing whether or not they had been selected as the preferred teammate from a given pairing. Scores on latent factors of general negative affect, anxiety-specific affect and depression-specific affect were estimated using participants' self-report scores on standardized measures of anxiety and depression together with factor loadings from a bifactor analysis conducted previously. Higher scores on the depression-specific factor were linked to more negative prior beliefs but were not associated with differences in belief updating. In contrast, higher scores on the anxiety-specific factor were associated with a negative bias in belief updating but no difference in prior beliefs. These findings indicate that, to at least some extent, distinct processes may impact the formation of belief priors and in-the-moment belief updating and that these processes may be differentially disrupted in depression and anxiety. Future directions for enquiry include examination of the possibility that prior beliefs biases in depression might reflect generalization from prior experiences or global schema whereas belief updating biases in anxiety might be more situationally specific.
| S-EPMC9377597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When asked to evaluate their probability of experiencing a negative life event, healthy individuals update their beliefs more following good news than bad. This is referred to as optimistic belief updating. By contrast, individuals with depression update their beliefs by a similar amount, showing reduced optimism. We conducted the first independent replication of this effect and extended this work to examine whether reduced optimistic belief updating in depression also occurs for positive life events. Replicating previous research, healthy and depression groups differed in belief updating for negative events (β = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.24, 1.18). Whereas healthy participants updated their beliefs more following good news than bad, individuals experiencing depression lacked this bias. However, our findings for positive events were inconclusive. While we did not find statistical evidence that patterns of belief updating between groups varied by valence (β = -0.51, 95% CI: -1.16, 0.15), mean update scores suggested that both groups showed largely similar updating for positive life events. Our results add confidence to previous findings that depression is characterized by negative future expectations maintained by reduced updating in response to good news. However, further research is required to understand the specificity of this to negative events, and into refining methods for quantifying belief updating in clinical and non-clinical research.
| S-EPMC8808098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPersecutory delusions are among the most common delusions in schizophrenia and represent the extreme end of the paranoia continuum. Paranoia is accompanied by significant worry and distress. Identifying cognitive mechanisms underlying paranoia is critical for advancing treatment. We hypothesized that aberrant belief updating, which is related to paranoia in human and animal models, would also contribute to persecutory beliefs in individuals with schizophrenia.MethodsBelief updating was assessed in 42 participants with schizophrenia and 44 healthy control participants using a 3-option probabilistic reversal learning task. Hierarchical Gaussian Filter was used to estimate computational parameters of belief updating. Paranoia was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and the revised Green et al. Paranoid Thoughts Scale. Unusual thought content was measured with the Psychosis Symptom Rating Scale and the Peters et al. Delusions Inventory. Worry was measured using the Dunn Worry Questionnaire.ResultsParanoia was significantly associated with elevated win-switch rate and prior beliefs about volatility both in schizophrenia and across the whole sample. These relationships were specific to paranoia and did not extend to unusual thought content or measures of anxiety. We observed a significant indirect effect of paranoia on the relationship between prior beliefs about volatility and worry.ConclusionsThis work provides evidence that relationships between belief updating parameters and paranoia extend to schizophrenia, may be specific to persecutory beliefs, and contribute to theoretical models implicating worry in the maintenance of persecutory delusions.
| S-EPMC9827723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:People rely on social information to inform their beliefs. We ask whether and to what degree the perceived prevalence of a belief influences belief adoption. We present the results of two experiments that show how increases in a person's estimated prevalence of a belief led to increased endorsement of said belief. Belief endorsement rose when impressions of the belief's prevalence were increased and when initial beliefs were uncertain, as predicted by a Bayesian cue integration framework. Thus, people weigh social information rationally. An implication of these results is that social engagement metrics that prompt inflated prevalence estimates in users risk increasing the believability and adoption of viral misinformation posts.
| S-EPMC9692052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many social interactions are characterized by dynamic interplay, such that individuals exert reciprocal influence over each other's behaviours and beliefs. The present study investigated how the dynamics of reciprocal influence affect individual beliefs in a social context, over and above the information communicated in an interaction. To this end, we developed a simple social decision-making paradigm in which two people are asked to make perceptual judgments while receiving information about each other's decisions. In a Static condition, information about the partner only conveyed their initial, independent judgment. However, in a Dynamic condition, each individual saw the evolving belief of their partner as they learnt about and responded to the individual's own judgment. The results indicated that in both conditions, the majority of confidence adjustments were characterized by an abrupt change followed by smaller adjustments around an equilibrium, and that participants' confidence was used to arbitrate conflict (although deviating from Bayesian norm). Crucially, recursive interaction had systematic effects on belief change relative to the static baseline, magnifying confidence change when partners agreed and reducing confidence change when they disagreed. These findings indicate that during dynamic interactions-often a characteristic of real-life and online social contexts-information is collectively transformed rather than acted upon by individuals in isolation. Consequently, the output of social events is not only influenced by what the dyad knows but also by predictable recursive and self-reinforcing dynamics.
| S-EPMC7423656 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC7347922 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has made the world seem less predictable. Such crises can lead people to feel that others are a threat. Here, we show that the initial phase of the pandemic in 2020 increased individuals' paranoia and made their belief updating more erratic. A proactive lockdown made people's belief updating less capricious. However, state-mandated mask-wearing increased paranoia and induced more erratic behaviour. This was most evident in states where adherence to mask-wearing rules was poor but where rule following is typically more common. Computational analyses of participant behaviour suggested that people with higher paranoia expected the task to be more unstable. People who were more paranoid endorsed conspiracies about mask-wearing and potential vaccines and the QAnon conspiracy theories. These beliefs were associated with erratic task behaviour and changed priors. Taken together, we found that real-world uncertainty increases paranoia and influences laboratory task behaviour.
| S-EPMC8458246 | biostudies-literature