Exploring the Bounded Rationality in Human Decision Anomalies Through an Assemblable Computational Framework
Yi-Long Lu,Yang-Fan Lu,Xiangjuan Ren,Hang Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.16.562648
2023-01-01
Abstract:Some seemingly irrational decision behaviors (anomalies), once seen as flaws in human cognition, have recently received explanations from a rational perspective. The basic idea is that the brain has limited cognitive resources to process the quantities (e.g., value, probability, time, etc.) required for decision making, with specific biases arising as byproducts of the resource allocation that is optimized for the environment. This idea, as a variant of bounded rationality, has grown into a fast-evolving subfield. However, the following issues may limit its development: the assumptions of different models lack consistency, each model typically focuses on one single environmental factor, and the covered decision anomalies are still limited. To address these issues, here we develop a computational framework—the Assemblable Resource-Rational Modules Framework (ARRM)—that integrates ideas from different lines of boundedly-rational decision models as freely assembled modules. The framework can accommodate the joint functioning of multiple environmental factors, and allow new models to be built and tested along with the existing ones, potentially opening a wider range of decision phenomena to bounded rationality modeling. We further apply ARRM to modeling the “peanuts effect” in decision under risk—people are more risk-seeking for gambles with smaller values, an anomaly that is pervasive and hard to explain. For one new and three published datasets that cover two different task paradigms and both the gain and loss domains, our boundedly-rational models reproduce two characteristic features of the peanuts effect and outperform previous models in fitting human decision behaviors.Author summary In daily life, we often make decisions that may seem illogical or irrational at first glance. These decisions were once viewed as mere flaws in our thinking. But what if our brains, with their limited processing power, are actually making the best possible choices given the constraints they face? Past work has introduced the concept of “bounded rationality”, suggesting that our seemingly illogical decisions are in fact rational, considering our brain’s constraints and the environment we operate in. Building on this foundation, we offer a fresh perspective. We have developed a tool, the Assemblable Resource-Rational Modules Framework (ARRM). Imagine this as a Lego set, where each piece represents different theories about our decision-making process, many of which have been proposed by earlier researchers. Our innovation is in how we can combine these pieces, enhancing our understanding of complex decisions. We applied this to the “peanuts effect”, where people risk more for smaller rewards. Our approach opens up new avenues for understanding why our brains make the choices they do in the vast, intricate landscape of daily life.### Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.