Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information
Signals that reduce uncertainty can be valuable because well-informed decision-makers can better align their preferences to opportunities. However, some birds and mammals display an appetite for informative signals that cannot be used to increase returns. We explore the role that reward-predictive s...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2022
|
| _version_ | 1797109053439082496 |
|---|---|
| author | Ajuwon, V Ojeda, A Murphy, R Monteiro, T Kacelnik, A |
| author_facet | Ajuwon, V Ojeda, A Murphy, R Monteiro, T Kacelnik, A |
| author_sort | Ajuwon, V |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Signals that reduce uncertainty can be valuable because well-informed decision-makers can better align their preferences to opportunities. However, some birds and mammals display an appetite for informative signals that cannot be used to increase returns. We explore the role that reward-predictive stimuli have in fostering such preferences, aiming at distinguishing between two putative underlying mechanisms. The ‘information hypothesis’ proposes that reducing uncertainty is reinforcing per se, somewhat consistently with the concept of curiosity: a motivation to know in the absence of tractable extrinsic benefits. In contrast, the ‘conditioned reinforcement hypothesis’, an associative account, proposes asymmetries in secondarily acquired reinforcement: post-choice stimuli announcing forthcoming rewards (S+) reinforce responses more than stimuli signalling no rewards (S−) inhibit responses. In three treatments, rats faced two equally profitable options delivering food probabilistically after a fixed delay. In the informative option (Info), food or no food was signalled immediately after choice, whereas in the non-informative option (NoInfo) outcomes were uncertain until the delay lapsed. Subjects preferred Info when (1) both outcomes were explicitly signalled by salient auditory cues, (2) only forthcoming food delivery was explicitly signalled, and (3) only the absence of forthcoming reward was explicitly signalled. Acquisition was slower in (3), when food was not explicitly signalled, showing that signals for positive outcomes have a greater influence on the development of preference than signals for negative ones. Our results are consistent with an elaborated conditioned reinforcement account, and with the conjecture that both uncertainty reduction and conditioned reinforcement jointly act to generate preference. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:36:41Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:961a3bc0-a50e-484b-89aa-f4b6aca5983f |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T07:36:41Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:961a3bc0-a50e-484b-89aa-f4b6aca5983f2023-03-13T08:18:32ZParadoxical choice and the reinforcing value of informationJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:961a3bc0-a50e-484b-89aa-f4b6aca5983fEnglishSymplectic ElementsSpringer2022Ajuwon, VOjeda, AMurphy, RMonteiro, TKacelnik, ASignals that reduce uncertainty can be valuable because well-informed decision-makers can better align their preferences to opportunities. However, some birds and mammals display an appetite for informative signals that cannot be used to increase returns. We explore the role that reward-predictive stimuli have in fostering such preferences, aiming at distinguishing between two putative underlying mechanisms. The ‘information hypothesis’ proposes that reducing uncertainty is reinforcing per se, somewhat consistently with the concept of curiosity: a motivation to know in the absence of tractable extrinsic benefits. In contrast, the ‘conditioned reinforcement hypothesis’, an associative account, proposes asymmetries in secondarily acquired reinforcement: post-choice stimuli announcing forthcoming rewards (S+) reinforce responses more than stimuli signalling no rewards (S−) inhibit responses. In three treatments, rats faced two equally profitable options delivering food probabilistically after a fixed delay. In the informative option (Info), food or no food was signalled immediately after choice, whereas in the non-informative option (NoInfo) outcomes were uncertain until the delay lapsed. Subjects preferred Info when (1) both outcomes were explicitly signalled by salient auditory cues, (2) only forthcoming food delivery was explicitly signalled, and (3) only the absence of forthcoming reward was explicitly signalled. Acquisition was slower in (3), when food was not explicitly signalled, showing that signals for positive outcomes have a greater influence on the development of preference than signals for negative ones. Our results are consistent with an elaborated conditioned reinforcement account, and with the conjecture that both uncertainty reduction and conditioned reinforcement jointly act to generate preference. |
| spellingShingle | Ajuwon, V Ojeda, A Murphy, R Monteiro, T Kacelnik, A Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title | Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title_full | Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title_fullStr | Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title_full_unstemmed | Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title_short | Paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| title_sort | paradoxical choice and the reinforcing value of information |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ajuwonv paradoxicalchoiceandthereinforcingvalueofinformation AT ojedaa paradoxicalchoiceandthereinforcingvalueofinformation AT murphyr paradoxicalchoiceandthereinforcingvalueofinformation AT monteirot paradoxicalchoiceandthereinforcingvalueofinformation AT kacelnika paradoxicalchoiceandthereinforcingvalueofinformation |