Cargando…

Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation

Little is known about how people learn to take into account others’ opinions in joint decisions. To address this question, we combined computational and empirical approaches. Human dyads made individual and joint visual perceptual decision and rated their confidence in those decisions (data previous...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mahmoodi, Ali, Bang, Dan, Ahmadabadi, Majid Nili, Bahrami, Bahador
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3855698/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24324677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081195
_version_ 1782294955284234240
author Mahmoodi, Ali
Bang, Dan
Ahmadabadi, Majid Nili
Bahrami, Bahador
author_facet Mahmoodi, Ali
Bang, Dan
Ahmadabadi, Majid Nili
Bahrami, Bahador
author_sort Mahmoodi, Ali
collection PubMed
description Little is known about how people learn to take into account others’ opinions in joint decisions. To address this question, we combined computational and empirical approaches. Human dyads made individual and joint visual perceptual decision and rated their confidence in those decisions (data previously published). We trained a reinforcement (temporal difference) learning agent to get the participants’ confidence level and learn to arrive at a dyadic decision by finding the policy that either maximized the accuracy of the model decisions or maximally conformed to the empirical dyadic decisions. When confidences were shared visually without verbal interaction, RL agents successfully captured social learning. When participants exchanged confidences visually and interacted verbally, no collective benefit was achieved and the model failed to predict the dyadic behaviour. Behaviourally, dyad members’ confidence increased progressively and verbal interaction accelerated this escalation. The success of the model in drawing collective benefit from dyad members was inversely related to confidence escalation rate. The findings show an automated learning agent can, in principle, combine individual opinions and achieve collective benefit but the same agent cannot discount the escalation suggesting that one cognitive component of collective decision making in human may involve discounting of overconfidence arising from interactions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3855698
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38556982013-12-09 Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation Mahmoodi, Ali Bang, Dan Ahmadabadi, Majid Nili Bahrami, Bahador PLoS One Research Article Little is known about how people learn to take into account others’ opinions in joint decisions. To address this question, we combined computational and empirical approaches. Human dyads made individual and joint visual perceptual decision and rated their confidence in those decisions (data previously published). We trained a reinforcement (temporal difference) learning agent to get the participants’ confidence level and learn to arrive at a dyadic decision by finding the policy that either maximized the accuracy of the model decisions or maximally conformed to the empirical dyadic decisions. When confidences were shared visually without verbal interaction, RL agents successfully captured social learning. When participants exchanged confidences visually and interacted verbally, no collective benefit was achieved and the model failed to predict the dyadic behaviour. Behaviourally, dyad members’ confidence increased progressively and verbal interaction accelerated this escalation. The success of the model in drawing collective benefit from dyad members was inversely related to confidence escalation rate. The findings show an automated learning agent can, in principle, combine individual opinions and achieve collective benefit but the same agent cannot discount the escalation suggesting that one cognitive component of collective decision making in human may involve discounting of overconfidence arising from interactions. Public Library of Science 2013-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3855698/ /pubmed/24324677 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081195 Text en © 2013 Mahmoodi et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mahmoodi, Ali
Bang, Dan
Ahmadabadi, Majid Nili
Bahrami, Bahador
Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title_full Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title_fullStr Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title_full_unstemmed Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title_short Learning to Make Collective Decisions: The Impact of Confidence Escalation
title_sort learning to make collective decisions: the impact of confidence escalation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3855698/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24324677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081195
work_keys_str_mv AT mahmoodiali learningtomakecollectivedecisionstheimpactofconfidenceescalation
AT bangdan learningtomakecollectivedecisionstheimpactofconfidenceescalation
AT ahmadabadimajidnili learningtomakecollectivedecisionstheimpactofconfidenceescalation
AT bahramibahador learningtomakecollectivedecisionstheimpactofconfidenceescalation