Author
Listed:
- Miruna Cotet
- David Poensgen
- Ian Krajbich
Abstract
Learning is fundamental to adaptive behavior. In the typical learning task, each action is associated with only one outcome, which could be immediate or delayed. However, actions often have multiple consequences that unfold over time. Here, we used behavioral and eye-tracking experiments to study how people learn when their choices yield both immediate and delayed reward information. Importantly, the rewards themselves were all delivered at the end of the study so there was no reason to weight immediate and delayed reward information differently. Instead, we found that our subjects overweighted immediate reward information. Moreover, this bias increased over the course of the experiment and was still present when learning from others’ choices. The gaze data reveal mixed evidence that subjects looked more at immediate vs. delayed feedback, and across subjects, the relative dwell proportion did not predict the behavioral bias. Our results indicate that people prioritize not just immediate rewards, but immediate reward information. Unlike temporal discounting, this form of impatience is a clear mistake and leads to objectively worse outcomes.Author summary: Decisions often produce several pieces of feedback. Some occur right away, others occur later. Although these signals can be equally useful, people may not treat them that way. In our study, we asked whether humans learn differently from information that arrives immediately versus information that arrives after a delay, even when both are equally valuable. Using a combination of behavioral experiments and eye-tracking, we found that people consistently placed too much emphasis on the immediate feedback. This tendency grew stronger over time and even appeared when participants were learning by watching others’ choices. Our findings show that people aren’t just drawn to immediate rewards—they are also overly affected by immediate information about those rewards. Unlike classic impatience, where immediate rewards are often genuinely better, immediate information provides no benefit in our setting and overweighting it leads to poor decisions. Our study reveals a systematic and costly quirk in how people learn, and offers an explanation for why people often seem so shortsighted.
Suggested Citation
Miruna Cotet & David Poensgen & Ian Krajbich, 2026.
"Delayed reward information is underweighted in reinforcement learning with dispersed feedback,"
PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(6), pages 1-25, June.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1014459
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014459
Download full text from publisher
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:pcbi00:1014459. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.