Human and pigeon suboptimal choice.

Area of Science:

• Behavioral economics
• Comparative psychology
• Decision-making

Background:

• Pigeons and humans sometimes make suboptimal choices, preferring less frequent larger rewards over consistent smaller ones.
• This suboptimal behavior is often linked to differential signaling of delayed outcomes, a factor not fully explored in human gambling analogies.
• Existing research lacks sufficient empirical data to validate the analogy between pigeon suboptimal choice and human gambling behavior.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate suboptimal choice behavior in both pigeons and humans using a controlled task.
• To compare how differential outcome signaling affects choice behavior in pigeons versus humans.
• To assess the potential of using pigeon models for understanding human gambling tendencies.

Main Methods:

• Subjects (pigeons and humans) performed a choice task involving a suboptimal (20% large reinforcer) and an optimal (100% small reinforcer) alternative.
• Outcome signaling during delays was manipulated for the suboptimal alternative across conditions.
• Human performance was also assessed on a probability discounting task.

Main Results:

• Pigeons chose the suboptimal alternative more frequently than humans when outcomes were signaled.
• When outcome signaling was absent, pigeons improved their choices (became more optimal), but human choices did not change.
• Human suboptimal choices did not correlate with their performance on the probability discounting task.

Conclusions:

• Both pigeons and humans demonstrate the capacity for suboptimal choice behavior.
• Differential outcome signaling significantly impacts pigeon choice but not human choice in this task.
• The current findings indicate that while pigeons can model aspects of suboptimal choice, more research is required to establish their validity as a model for human gambling.