Non-Adaptive Choice Switching Bias

Automatic bias. False priorities. A tendency to over-reliance on automated systems, which can lead to incorrect automated information overriding correct decisions. Bias in attention Bias in accessibility The tendency to perceive repetitive thoughts. Result error. The tendency to judge a decision based on its final outcome rather than the quality of the decision at the time it was made. Projection bias. The tendency to overestimate how much our future self shares our current preferences, thoughts, and values, leading to less-than-optimal choices. [Sources: 10]

Hyperbolic actualization leads to choices that become inconsistent over time: people today make choices that their “I” in the future would prefer not to make, despite the fact that they use the same reasoning. When regret is an unfortunate consequence of making a right decision, or when previous results are unrelated to subsequent choices, blindly changing choices can lead to biased decisions. When faced with a negative outcome from one of your past decisions, you tend to avoid making choices by facing similar challenges, even if the same choices you made in the past are optimal. Having received a negative result for making a decision, we tend to avoid that decision when faced with another problem, even if it was the optimal choice at the time. [Sources: 1, 5, 10, 11]

In addition, by treating someone as expected, that person may inadvertently alter their behavior to match the expectations, thereby providing additional support for the confirmation bias on the part of the perceiver. In interpersonal relationships, confirmatory bias can be problematic as it can lead to inaccurate and distorted impressions of others. Importance Confirmation bias is important because it can cause people to forcibly hold false beliefs or give more weight to information that supports their beliefs than the evidence supports. Supporting evidence bias is strong and widespread, and manifests itself in a wide variety of contexts. [Sources: 4]

The process of making decisions and processing information by people is often biased, because people simply interpret information from their point of view. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in conflicting information being ignored. Conspiracy theories, for example, are often influenced by various prejudices. Even the smartest people are biased in their judgments and choices. [Sources: 4, 11]

To avoid maladaptive bias towards changing choices, you must 1) acknowledge that you may be subject to such bias and 2) ensure that you have the data you need to make an objective choice. While nothing really exists in a vacuum, it is important to envision innovative decision making without reference to the past. Therefore, being able to look back and assess our past choices allows us to change future behavior and, apparently, make better decisions. We and others have previously found that these biases in choice history exhibit several hallmarks of rational and adaptive learning – for example, they are flexible in adapting to environmental stability and are governed by confidence in previous decisions (Urai et al. [Sources: 1, 5, 8]

Taken together, perceptual choice is imbalanced with respect to previous choice, modulation that grows with confidence in previous decisions, and from the direction of previous evidence, modulation that grows with the strength of previous evidence. These results indicate that previous choices and previous incentives can induce bias at certain stages of perceptual decision making. These results indicate a simultaneous bias in repetition of choices modulated by certainty in decisions and in adaptations of evidence modulated by the strength of the evidence that skew current perceptual decisions in opposite directions. Previous research shows that this repetition bias increased after previous decisions with a high degree of confidence, as indicated by response times (Urai, Braun & Donner, 2017), but also when previous decisions were based on weak sensory data ( Akaishi, Umeda, Nagase, Sakai, 2014). [Sources: 3]

These results suggest that characteristic attributes of sensory stimuli may influence selection bias, even if they are not predictive in the task [2AFC-2AUC]. These results demonstrate that gradients of stimulus similarity did not influence the generation of selection bias in our tasks [2AFC-2AUC] in mice and humans. Taken together, these results demonstrate how discriminating stimulus reduces choice bias in the actions of 2AFCs in mice and humans (see also Supplementary Figure S2). Using these adaptations, we found that stimulus similarity increased choice lateral bias in the 2AFC tasks but not in the 2AUC tasks. [Sources: 6]

In addition, by reinforcing lateral preference and alternation, we found that selection biases readily adapt to non-visual manipulation. These results demonstrate that selection bias in our tasks is consistent with recent reward history and that different levels of choice stereotypes can be exacerbated in mice and humans. Thus, selection bias was robust and relatively stable, but it was also adaptable, allowing both mice and humans to update their problem-solving strategies to cope with the specific demands of experimentation. Individuals’ tendencies to repeat or change their choices were recorded by changing their history-dependent drift bias (Figure B). [Sources: 6, 8]

The second study examined the mechanism underlying this bias, and the results supported the hypothesis that this maladaptive change in choice is caused by inhibition of the previous decision (a direct effect of experienced regret), and not by increased sensitivity to regret. subsequent choice (indirect effect of experienced regret mediated by expected regret). Non-adaptive change in choice [75] After experiencing a negative outcome of a decision problem, the tendency to avoid choices made earlier when faced with the same decision problem, even if the choice was optimal. Pseudo-Confidence Effect Prospect Theory The tendency to make non-risk choices when the expected outcome is positive, but to make risk-based choices to avoid negative outcomes. This learning process results in the constant updating of previous expectations from one decision to the next, which then distorts the current choice. [Sources: 5, 8, 10]

We agree that changing bias is usually important, but we also believe that understanding the components of decision-making is important to understanding perceptual decision-making. However, we believe that although control bias is a very important aspect of perceptual research, it is also important to describe selection bias because they are an integral part of perceptual decision-making. As we described in the introduction of the manuscript, we believe that the existence of global selection bias in the perceptual recognition problem has been recognized and incorporated into the current decision-making model, but we have been unable to find evidence to unravel the process of perception and composition. In literature. In addition, since the above analysis focuses on the distortion effects of previous selections, it is not clear that the evidence of previous stimuli affects subsequent visual processing. [Sources: 0, 3]

We then fit a number of more complex models to the data, showing that selection history bias most likely stems from imbalanced inputs (recall selective neural responses to stimuli in the sensory cortex) to the accumulators that drive behavioral choice (Figure C, right). [Sources: 8]


— Slimane Zouggari


##### Sources #####