Cargando…

Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk

The standard theory of rationality posits that agents order preferences according to average utilities associated with different choices. Expected utility theory has repeatedly failed as a predictive theory, as reflected in a growing literature in behavioural economics. Evolutionary theorists have s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Price, Michael Holton, Jones, James Holland
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10427448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37588378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2020.28
_version_ 1785090243314057216
author Price, Michael Holton
Jones, James Holland
author_facet Price, Michael Holton
Jones, James Holland
author_sort Price, Michael Holton
collection PubMed
description The standard theory of rationality posits that agents order preferences according to average utilities associated with different choices. Expected utility theory has repeatedly failed as a predictive theory, as reflected in a growing literature in behavioural economics. Evolutionary theorists have suggested that seemingly irrational behaviours in contemporary contexts may have once served important functions, but existing work linking fitness and choice has not adequately addressed the challenges of constructing an evolutionary theory of decision making. In particular, fitness itself is not a reasonable metric for decision making since its timescale exceeds the lifespan of the decision-maker. Consequently, organisms use proximate systems that work on appropriate timescales and are amenable to feedback and learning. We develop an evolutionary principal–agent model in which individuals utilize a set of proximal choice variables to account for the non-linear dependence of these variables on consumption. While this is insufficient to maximize fitness in the presence of environmental stochasticity, maximum fitness can be achieved by adopting pessimistic probability weightings compatible with the rank-dependent expected utility family of choice models. In particular, pessimistic probability weighting emerges naturally in an evolutionary framework because of extreme intolerance to zeros in multiplicative growth processes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10427448
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104274482023-08-16 Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk Price, Michael Holton Jones, James Holland Evol Hum Sci Research Article The standard theory of rationality posits that agents order preferences according to average utilities associated with different choices. Expected utility theory has repeatedly failed as a predictive theory, as reflected in a growing literature in behavioural economics. Evolutionary theorists have suggested that seemingly irrational behaviours in contemporary contexts may have once served important functions, but existing work linking fitness and choice has not adequately addressed the challenges of constructing an evolutionary theory of decision making. In particular, fitness itself is not a reasonable metric for decision making since its timescale exceeds the lifespan of the decision-maker. Consequently, organisms use proximate systems that work on appropriate timescales and are amenable to feedback and learning. We develop an evolutionary principal–agent model in which individuals utilize a set of proximal choice variables to account for the non-linear dependence of these variables on consumption. While this is insufficient to maximize fitness in the presence of environmental stochasticity, maximum fitness can be achieved by adopting pessimistic probability weightings compatible with the rank-dependent expected utility family of choice models. In particular, pessimistic probability weighting emerges naturally in an evolutionary framework because of extreme intolerance to zeros in multiplicative growth processes. Cambridge University Press 2020-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10427448/ /pubmed/37588378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2020.28 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Price, Michael Holton
Jones, James Holland
Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title_full Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title_fullStr Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title_full_unstemmed Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title_short Fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
title_sort fitness-maximizers employ pessimistic probability weighting for decisions under risk
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10427448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37588378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2020.28
work_keys_str_mv AT pricemichaelholton fitnessmaximizersemploypessimisticprobabilityweightingfordecisionsunderrisk
AT jonesjamesholland fitnessmaximizersemploypessimisticprobabilityweightingfordecisionsunderrisk