IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1008863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling

Author

Listed:
  • Frederick Callaway
  • Antonio Rangel
  • Thomas L Griffiths

Abstract

Simple choices (e.g., eating an apple vs. an orange) are made by integrating noisy evidence that is sampled over time and influenced by visual attention; as a result, fluctuations in visual attention can affect choices. But what determines what is fixated and when? To address this question, we model the decision process for simple choice as an information sampling problem, and approximate the optimal sampling policy. We find that it is optimal to sample from options whose value estimates are both high and uncertain. Furthermore, the optimal policy provides a reasonable account of fixations and choices in binary and trinary simple choice, as well as the differences between the two cases. Overall, the results show that the fixation process during simple choice is influenced dynamically by the value estimates computed during the decision process, in a manner consistent with optimal information sampling.Author summary: Any supermarket shopper is familiar with the problem of choosing between a small number of items. Even these “simple choices” can be challenging because we have to think about the options to determine which one we like most, and we can’t think about all of them at once. This raises a question: what should we think about—and for how long should we think—before making a decision? We formalize this question as an information sampling problem, and identify an optimal solution. Observing what people look at while making choices, we find that many of the key patterns in their eye fixations are consistent with optimal information sampling.

Suggested Citation

  • Frederick Callaway & Antonio Rangel & Thomas L Griffiths, 2021. "Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-29, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1008863
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008863
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008863&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008863?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mikael Sunnåker & Alberto Giovanni Busetto & Elina Numminen & Jukka Corander & Matthieu Foll & Christophe Dessimoz, 2013. "Approximate Bayesian Computation," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, January.
    2. Sebastian Gluth & Nadja Kern & Maria Kortmann & Cécile L. Vitali, 2020. "Value-based attention but not divisive normalization influences decisions with multiple alternatives," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 634-645, June.
    3. Thomas C Cassey & David R Evens & Rafal Bogacz & James A R Marshall & Casimir J H Ludwig, 2013. "Adaptive Sampling of Information in Perceptual Decision-Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    5. Bas van Opheusden & Luigi Acerbi & Wei Ji Ma, 2020. "Unbiased and efficient log-likelihood estimation with inverse binomial sampling," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-32, December.
    6. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    7. Hébert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2023. "Rational inattention when decisions take time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    8. Romy Frömer & Carolyn K. Dean Wolf & Amitai Shenhav, 2019. "Goal congruency dominates reward value in accounting for behavioral and neural correlates of value-based decision-making," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Armin W. Thomas & Felix Molter & Ian Krajbich & Hauke R. Heekeren & Peter N. C. Mohr, 2019. "Gaze bias differences capture individual choice behaviour," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(6), pages 625-635, June.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:6:p:437-449 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Thomas, Armin W. & Molter, Felix & Krajbich, Ian & Heekeren, Hauke R. & Mohr, Peter N. C., 2019. "Gaze bias differences capture individual choice behaviour," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 3(6), pages 625-635.
    12. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2013. "Behavioral Implications of Rational Inattention with Shannon Entropy," NBER Working Papers 19318, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Benjamin Hébert & Michael Woodford, 2017. "Rational Inattention and Sequential Information Sampling," NBER Working Papers 23787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Hebert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2017. "Rational Inattention with Sequential Information Sampling," Research Papers repec:ecl:stabus:3457, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Savannah Wei Shi & Michel Wedel & F. G. M. (Rik) Pieters, 2013. "Information Acquisition During Online Decision Making: A Model-Based Exploration Using Eye-Tracking Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1009-1026, May.
    16. Jiri Najemnik & Wilson S. Geisler, 2005. "Optimal eye movement strategies in visual search," Nature, Nature, vol. 434(7031), pages 387-391, March.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:396-403 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Satohiro Tajima & Jan Drugowitsch & Alexandre Pouget, 2016. "Optimal policy for value-based decision-making," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, November.
    19. K. Carrie Armel & Antonio Rangel, 2008. "The Impact of Computation Time and Experience on Decision Values," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 163-168, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1287-1312 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Michel Wedel & Rik Pieters & Ralf Lans, 2023. "Modeling Eye Movements During Decision Making: A Review," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 697-729, June.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1287-1312 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michel Wedel & Rik Pieters & Ralf Lans, 2023. "Modeling Eye Movements During Decision Making: A Review," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 697-729, June.
    2. Moshe Glickman & Orian Sharoni & Dino J Levy & Ernst Niebur & Veit Stuphorn & Marius Usher, 2019. "The formation of preference in risky choice," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-25, August.
    3. Matveenko, Andrei & Starkov, Egor, 2023. "Sparking curiosity or tipping the scales? Targeted advertising with consumer learning," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 172-192.
    4. Fischbacher, Urs & Hausfeld, Jan & Renerte, Baiba, 2022. "Strategic incentives undermine gaze as a signal of prosocial motives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 63-91.
    5. Benjamin Hébert & Michael Woodford, 2018. "Information Costs and Sequential Information Sampling," NBER Working Papers 25316, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2021. "Visual judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in stochastic choice?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Benjamin Hébert & Michael Woodford, 2021. "Neighborhood-Based Information Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3225-3255, October.
    8. Gaglianone, Wagner Piazza & Giacomini, Raffaella & Issler, João Victor & Skreta, Vasiliki, 2022. "Incentive-driven inattention," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 188-212.
    9. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2019. "Judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in choice?," MPRA Paper 93126, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2020. "An economist and a psychologist form a line: What can imperfect perception of length tell us about stochastic choice?," MPRA Paper 99417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Weijie Zhong, 2018. "The Indirect Cost of Information," Papers 1809.00697, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2020.
    12. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Samek, Anya & Hur, Inkyoung & Kim, Sung-Hee & Yi, Ji Soo, 2016. "An experimental study of the decision process with interactive technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 20-32.
    14. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    15. Hébert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2023. "Rational inattention when decisions take time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    16. Hu, Yingyao & Kayaba, Yutaka & Shum, Matthew, 2013. "Nonparametric learning rules from bandit experiments: The eyes have it!," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 215-231.
    17. Roc Armenter & Michèle Müller-Itten & Zachary Stangebye, 2020. "Rational Inattention via Ignorance Equivalence," Working Papers 20-24, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    18. David Walker-Jones, 2019. "Rational Inattention and Perceptual Distance," Papers 1909.00888, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    19. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Ernst Fehr & Nick Netzer, 2021. "Time Will Tell: Recovering Preferences When Choices Are Noisy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1828-1877.
    20. Altmann, Steffen & Grunewald, Andreas & Radbruch, Jonas, 2019. "Passive Choices and Cognitive Spillovers," IZA Discussion Papers 12337, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1008863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.