Modeling Decision-Making Under Uncertainty with Qualitative Outcomes

Author:

Korem NachshonORCID,Or Duek,Rounan Jia,Wertheimer Emily,Metviner Sierra,Grubb Michael,Levy Ifat

Abstract

AbstractModeling decision-making under uncertainty typically relies on quantitative outcomes. Many decisions, however, are qualitative in nature, posing problems for traditional models. Here, we aimed to model uncertainty attitudes in decisions with qualitative outcomes. Participants made choices between certain outcomes and the chance for more favorable outcomes in quantitative (monetary) and qualitative (medical) modalities. Using computational modeling, we estimated the values participants assigned to qualitative outcomes and compared uncertainty attitudes across domains. Our model provided a good fit for the data, including quantitative estimates for qualitative outcomes. The model outperformed a utility function in quantitative decisions. Additionally, we found an association between ambiguity attitudes across domains. Results were replicated in an independent sample. We demonstrate the ability to extract quantitative measures from qualitative outcomes, leading to better estimation of subjective values. This allows for the characterization of individual behavior traits under a wide range of conditions.Author SummaryIn the current study, we explored how people make decisions when the outcomes aren’t easily measured in numbers, such as in medical choices. Traditional mathematical models, which rely on numerical data, often fall short in these situations, leading to a gap in understanding how people evaluate these qualitative outcomes. Using hierarchical Bayesian modeling, we developed a model that bridges this gap by translating qualitative outcomes into individualized quantitative values, enabling us to better understand the underlying decision-making processes. Our model not only provides a better fit to real-world data than existing models with qualitative or quantitative outcomes but also allows for meaningful comparisons of how people handle uncertainty across different decision-making scenarios. This approach opens new doors for studying decision-making in areas where traditional methods struggle, offering a more nuanced view of human behavior in complex situations.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3