title: Sequential decisions: a computational comparison of observational and reinforcement accounts.
abstract: Right brain damaged patients show impairments in sequential decision making tasks for which healthy people do not show any difficulty. We hypothesized that this difficulty could be due to the failure of right brain damage patients to develop well-matched models of the world. Our motivation is the idea that to navigate uncertainty, humans use models of the world to direct the decisions they make when interacting with their environment. The better the model is, the better their decisions are. To explore the model building and updating process in humans and the basis for impairment after brain injury, we used a computational model of non-stationary sequence learning. RELPH (Reinforcement and Entropy Learned Pruned Hypothesis space) was able to qualitatively and quantitatively reproduce the results of left and right brain damaged patient groups and healthy controls playing a sequential version of Rock, Paper, Scissors. Our results suggests that, in general, humans employ a sub-optimal reinforcement based learning method rather than an objectively better statistical learning approach, and that differences between right brain damaged and healthy control groups can be explained by different exploration policies, rather than qualitatively different learning mechanisms.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Nazanin
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Mohammadi Sepahvand
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Elisabeth
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Stöttinger
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: James
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Danckert
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: Britt
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Anderson
mesh_terms: D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000523:psychology; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D008960:Models, Psychological; D012054:Reinforcement, Psychology; D013997:Time Factors
references.citation: Front Neurosci. 2012 Jun 08;6:85
references.pmid: 22701401
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2013 Nov;51(13):2526-33
references.pmid: 24075841
references.citation: Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 May 29;7:224
references.pmid: 23754998
references.citation: Nebr Symp Motiv. 2012;59:1-4
references.pmid: 23437627
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Jun 15;441(7095):876-9
references.pmid: 16778890
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Jan 20;7(1):e1001048
references.pmid: 21283774
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 2012 May;138(3):389-414
references.pmid: 22545686
references.citation: Nebr Symp Motiv. 2012;59:117-46
references.pmid: 23437632
references.citation: Cogn Sci. 2014 Sep-Oct;38(7):1482-92
references.pmid: 24646145
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 Sep;17(9):767-73
references.pmid: 16984293
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 May 29;362(1481):933-42
references.pmid: 17395573
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Sep 14;107(37):16401-6
references.pmid: 20805507
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012 Jul 11;13(8):572-86
references.pmid: 22781958
references.citation: Anim Cogn. 2011 Jul;14(4):465-76
references.pmid: 21360119
references.citation: Front Psychol. 2012 Apr 02;3:96
references.pmid: 22485102
references.citation: Neuron. 2010 May 27;66(4):585-95
references.pmid: 20510862
references.citation: Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2004 Sep;3(3):159-72
references.pmid: 15653813
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Mar;34(2):399-407
references.pmid: 18315414
references.citation: Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2012 Jun 1;21(3):170-176
references.pmid: 24000273
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2012 Dec;22(12):2745-60
references.pmid: 22178711