Linking compromise and responsibility attribution to risky decision-making in dyadic foraging

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Science
• Social Psychology
• Behavioral Economics

Background:

• Joint decision-making under risk is common in daily life, from personal finance to social interactions.
• Conflicting risk preferences and evaluating partner responsibility pose challenges in collaborative contexts.
• The psychological and computational mechanisms driving compromise in joint decision-making remain underexplored.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the conditions under which individuals compromise during joint decision-making with conflicting risk preferences.
• To explore the computational models explaining compromise behavior and the role of responsibility attributions.
• To examine the benefits of compromise for individual performance, social desirability, and outcome evaluation.

Main Methods:

• Development of a dyadic foraging paradigm to simulate joint decision-making with varying risk preferences.
• Two studies (N=250 and N=514) involving participants making joint choices and evaluating shared outcomes.
• Application of reinforcement learning models to computationally analyze compromise strategies and egocentric biases in responsibility attribution.

Main Results:

• Participants predominantly compromised rather than counteracted their partners, particularly when risk preferences diverged and compromise was reciprocated.
• Reinforcement learning models indicated that compromise involves integrating one's own preferences with those of the partner.
• Egocentric biases in responsibility attribution (claiming more credit for wins) were linked to compromise behavior, influencing coordination patterns.

Conclusions:

• Compromise in joint decision-making is influenced by diverging risk preferences, reciprocity, and integrated learning of partner preferences.
• Egocentric biases in responsibility attribution play a role in compromise behavior and social coordination.
• Compromising offers significant benefits, including improved performance for risk-averse individuals, enhanced social desirability, and more favorable self-assessments of responsibility.