Disentangling choice value and choice conflict in sequential decisions under risk

Recent years have witnessed a surge of interest in understanding the neural and cognitive dynamics that drive sequential decision making in general and foraging behavior in particular. Due to the intrinsic properties of most sequential decision-making paradigms, however, previous research in this area has suffered from the difficulty to disentangle properties of the decision related to (a) the value of switching to a new patch versus, which increases monotonically, and (b) the conflict experienced between choosing to stay or leave, which first increases but then decreases after reaching the point of indifference between staying and switching. Here, we show how the same problems arise in studies of sequential decision-making under risk, and how they can be overcome, taking as a specific example recent research on the ‘pig’ dice game. In each round of the ‘pig’ dice game, people roll a die and accumulate rewards until they either decide to proceed to the next round or lose all rewards. By combining simulation-based dissections of the task structure with two experiments, we show how an extension of the standard paradigm, together with cognitive modeling of decision-making processes, allows to disentangle properties related to either switch value or choice conflict. Our study elucidates the cognitive mechanisms of sequential decision making and underscores the importance of avoiding potential pitfalls of paradigms that are commonly used in this research area.Author summary: A large body of work has investigated how people make sequential decisions under risk. For instance, how people decide whether to continue gambling for potentially greater rewards or to cash in to avoid losing everything. Here, we identify a critical confound in this line of research, between (a) the value of switching and (b) the amount of conflict between choosing to stay or switch. Using a previously proposed paradigm (i.e., the pig dice game) as an example, we replicated behavior from a recent study and showed that switch value is highly correlated with choice conflict. By simulating behavior across hypothetical contexts, we then identified and tested novel variants of this task that allow to deconfound switch value and conflict. However, only by means of sequential sampling modeling we could conclude that it is conflict rather than switch value that drives response times in this task. Sequential sampling modeling also shows how the switch value influences other cognitive components in this task.