There are at least two kinds of probability matching: Evidence from a secondary task

Probability matching is a suboptimal behavior that often plagues human decision-making in simple repeated choice tasks. Despite decades of research, recent studies cannot find agreement on what choice strategies lead to probability matching. We propose a solution, showing that two distinct local choice strategies-which make different demands on executive resources-both result in probability-matching behavior on a global level. By placing participants in a simple binary prediction task under dual- versus single-task conditions, we find that individuals with compromised executive resources are driven away from a one-trial-back strategy (utilized by participants with intact executive resources) and towards a strategy that integrates a longer window of past outcomes into the current prediction. Crucially, both groups of participants exhibited probability-matching behavior to the same extent at a global level of analysis. We suggest that these two forms of probability matching are byproducts of the operation of explicit versus implicit systems.

[1]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[2]  Edmund Fantino,et al.  Probability matching: encouraging optimal responding in humans. , 2002, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[3]  W. Newsome,et al.  Matching Behavior and the Representation of Value in the Parietal Cortex , 2004, Science.

[4]  Michael B. Miller,et al.  The Left Hemisphere's Role in Hypothesis Formation , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. , 1998, Psychological review.

[6]  C P Shimp,et al.  Short-term memory in the pigeon: the previously reinforced response. , 1976, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[7]  David L. Faigman,et al.  Human category learning. , 2005, Annual review of psychology.

[8]  K. Henke A model for memory systems based on processing modes rather than consciousness , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[9]  Michael B. Miller,et al.  Searching for patterns in random sequences. , 2004, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[10]  H. Pashler Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  W. Gaissmaier,et al.  The smart potential behind probability matching , 2008, Cognition.

[12]  D. Koehler,et al.  Probability matching in choice under uncertainty: Intuition versus deliberation , 2009, Cognition.

[13]  R. Rescorla,et al.  A theory of Pavlovian conditioning : Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement , 1972 .

[14]  Russell A Poldrack,et al.  Modulation of competing memory systems by distraction. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Nir Vulkan An Economist's Perspective on Probability Matching , 2000 .

[16]  J. Hinson,et al.  Hill-climbing by pigeons. , 1983, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  P Killeen,et al.  The matching law. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[18]  C S Green,et al.  Alterations in choice behavior by manipulations of world model , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.