choice. there’s never just one reinforcer hmm…what to do?
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Choice
![Page 2: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
There’s never just one reinforcer
Hmm…what to do?
![Page 3: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Studying Choice Experimentally
• Hernstein
“concurrent schedules”
VI 10 VI 30
![Page 4: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The Matching Law
• RA = rate of response A
• rA = payoff rate for response A
RA
RA + RB
rA
rA + rB
=
![Page 5: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Matching (R.J. Herrnstein)
resp
ondi
ng
![Page 6: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Choice with uncertainty in real life
Kahneman’s Nobel Prize diploma
Kahneman & Tversky
![Page 7: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Prospect Theory
-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-505101520
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20 0
20
40
60
80
100
x [actual value]
v(x
) [p
erc
eiv
ed
va
lue
]
Kahneman & Tversky (1981)
"We have an irrational tendency to be less willing to gamble with profits than with losses."
![Page 8: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Prospect Theory
Kahneman & Tversky (1981)
"We have an irrational tendency to be less willing to gamble with profits than with losses."
![Page 9: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Two programs to combat disease:
• If program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved.
• If program B is adopted, there is a 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved, and 2/3 probability that no one will be saved.
![Page 10: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Two programs to combat disease:
• If program C is adopted, 400 people will be die.
• If program D is adopted, there is a 1/3 probability that nobody will die, and 2/3 probability that 600 people will die.
![Page 11: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
loss gain
Val
ue
-600 -400
V(-400)V(-600)
V(200)V(600)
200 600
Prospect Theory
![Page 12: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
A purchasing decision
• A box of cereal costs $5 at the local grocery store, but only $2 at the grocery store across town.
Would you go to the grocery store across town?
![Page 13: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
A purchasing decision
• A television costs $178 at the local electronics store, but only $175 at the electronics store across town.
Would you go to the electronics store across town?
![Page 14: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Prospect Theory
loss gain
Val
ue
-$17
8 v.
-$1
75
V(-175) v. V(-178)
V(-2) v. V-5)
--$2
v. -
$5
![Page 15: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
You’re the CEO of a credit card company
The customer must bear some of the costs associated with the processing of credit card purchases. How would you want the price difference to be framed?
– A cash discount?– A credit card surcharge?
![Page 16: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Prospect Theory
loss gain
Val
ue
The loss side of the curve is steeper than the gain side.
The pain of losses is stronger than the pleasure of gains.
![Page 17: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Endowment EffectKahneman, Knetsch & Thaler (1990)
Pilot studies showed the pen and mug to be equally preferred (50% of people prefer pen, 50% prefer mug)
But when subjects actually given one item, and then given the opportunity to trade, only 10% traded
![Page 18: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Major features of prospect theory(summary)
• Reference level dependence: An individual views consequences (monetary or other) in terms of changes from the reference level, which is usually that individual's status quo.
• Gain and loss satiation: The values of the outcomes for both positive and negative consequences of the choice have the diminishing returns characteristic.
• Loss aversion: The resulting value function is steeper for losses than for gains; losing $100 produces more pain than gaining $100 produces pleasure.
![Page 19: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
The consequences of choiceHaving choices is a good thing, right?
More choices = Better chance of finding what you want
Ultimately more satisfaction with what you chose
More freedom
![Page 20: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
The consequences of choice
More choices = More options to evaluate (more time and effort)
More options to ultimately turn down
More options to possibly regret turning down (opportunity costs)
![Page 21: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Consequences of choiceIyengar & Lepper (2000): Subjects choose one chocolate to
sample
Condition 1: Limited selection
Condition 2: Extensive selection
% who choose chocolate as compensation:
Satisfaction with sampled chocolate (1-7 scale):
48% 12%
6.28 5.46
![Page 22: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Deferral of ChoiceRedelmeier & Shafir (1995)
Legislators in the Ontario Provincial Parliament presented with the following scenarios:
Scenario #2:
Two failing hospitals providing redundant services and losing money
Do you close one of them down?
Scenario #1:
There’s a failing hospital providing redundant services and losing money
Do you close it down?
66% say “yes” Only 25% say “yes”!
![Page 23: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Avoidance of Choice
$1.50 v.
($2 value)
($2 value)
v.
Conflict ConditionControl Condition
$1.50 v.
($2 value)
Tversky & Shafir (1992)
75% of S’s choose pen 47% of S’s choose a pen (53% choose money)!
![Page 24: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
What to do? Be a satisficer.• Maximizers:
– Seek and accept only the best– Strive to find the best possible decisions– Attempts to examine all alternatives
before choosing– Often their decisions to the decisions of
others
– Feel less positive about their purchasing decisions
– Savor positive events less – Do not cope as well with
negative events– Tend to brood and ruminate
more
• Satisficers– Settle for good enough
– Set criteria and standards; choose first option that meets them.
Schwartz et al (2002)
![Page 25: Choice. There’s never just one reinforcer Hmm…what to do?](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062321/56649d9f5503460f94a8ad12/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Are you a maximizer?
1. Whenever I’m faced with a choice, I try to imagine what all the other possibilities are, even ones that aren’t present at the moment
2. No matter how satisfied I am with my job, it’s only right for me to be on the lookout for better opportunities
3. I find that writing is very difficult, even if it’s just writing a letter to a friend, because it’s so hard to work things just right. I often do several drafts of even the simplest things.
4. I often fantasize about living in ways that are quite different from my actual life.
From Schwartz et al (2002)