Decision-making under uncertainty: Biases and Bayesians

Animal Cognition

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 465-476

  Trimmer, Pete C ^a   Houston, Alasdair I ^a   Marshall, James A R ^b   Mendl, Mike T ^a   Paul, Elizabeth S ^a   McNamara, John M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ambiguity; Animal decisions; Cognitive bias; Ellsberg Paradox; Risk; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATION; BAYES THEOREM; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REVIEW; RISK; UNCERTAINTY;

BAYES THEOREM; CUES; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PROBABILITY; RISK; UNCERTAINTY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 79959280751     PISSN: 14359448     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10071-011-0387-4     Document Type: Review

References (89)

1. Abrams PA (1994) Should prey overestimate the risk of predation? Am Nat 144: 317-328.
2. Al-Najjar N, Weinstein J (2009) The ambiguity aversion literature: a critical assessment. Econ Philos 25: 249-284.
3. Bach DR, Seymour B, Dolan RJ (2009) Neural activity associated with the passive prediction of ambiguity and risk for aversive events. J Neurosci 29: 1648-1656.
4. Basile BM, Hampton RR, Suomi SJ, Murray EA (2009) An assessment of memory awareness in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 12: 169-180.
5. Bednekoff PA, Houston AI (1994) Dynamic models of mass-dependent predation, risk-sensitive foraging, and premigratory fattening in birds. Ecology 75: 1131-1140.
6. Binmore K (2009) Making decisions in large worlds. http://www. else. econ. ucl. ac. uk/papers/uploaded/266. pdf.
7. Blanchette I, Richards A (2003) Anxiety and the interpretation of ambiguous information: beyond the emotion-congruent effect. J Exp Psychol Gen 132: 294-309.
8. Bouskila A, Blumstein DT (1992) Rules of thumb for predation hazard assessment - predictions from a dynamic model. Am Nat 139: 161-176.
9. Burman OHP, Parker R, Paul ES, Mendl M (2008) A spatial judgement task to determine background emotional state in laboratory rats, Rattus norvegicus. Anim Behav 76: 801-809.
10. Call J (2010) Do apes know that they could be wrong? Anim Cogn (in press). doi: 10. 1007/s10071-010-0317-x.
11. Camerer C, Weber M (1992) Recent developments in modeling preferences-uncertainty and ambiguity. J Risk Uncertainty 5: 325-370.
12. Carlin BP, Louis TA (1996) Bayes and empirical Bayes methods for data analysis. Monographs on statistics and applied probability 69. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 50-52.
13. Christopoulos GI, Tobler PN, Bossaerts P, Dolan RJ, Schultz W (2009) Neural correlates of value, risk, and risk aversion contributing to decision making under risk. J Neurosci 29: 12574-12583.
14. Dayan P, Daw ND (2008) Decision theory, reinforcement learning, and the brain. Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience 8(4): 429-453.
15. Dobbs IM (1991) A Bayesian approach to decision-making under ambiguity. Economica, New Series 58(232): 417-440.
16. Ellsberg D (1961) Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms. Q J Econ 75(4): 643-669.
17. Erichsen JT, Krebs JR, Houston AI (1980) Optimal foraging and cryptic prey. J Anim Ecol 49: 271-276.
18. Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U (1995) How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: frequency formats. Psychol Rev 102(4): 684-704.
19. Gigerenzer G, Todd PM (1999) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
20. Halevy Y, Feltkamp V (2005) A Bayesian approach to uncertainty aversion. Rev Econ Stud 72(2): 449-466.
21. Hampton RR, Zivin A, Murray EA (2004) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) discriminate between knowing and not knowing and collect information as needed before acting. Anim Cogn 7: 239-246.
22. Harding EJ, Paul ES, Mendl M (2004) Animal behavior-cognitive bias and affective state. Nature 427: 312.
23. Hayden BY, Platt ML (2009) Gambling for Gatorade: risk-sensitive decision making for fluid rewards in humans. Anim Cogn 12: 201-207.
24. Hayden BY, Heilbronner SR, Platt ML (2010) Ambiguity aversion in rhesus macaques. Frontiers in Neuroscience 4: 1-7.
25. Hazen GB (1992) Decisions versus policy: an expected utility resolution of the Ellsberg Paradox. In: Geweke J (ed) Decision making under risk and uncertainty: new models and empirical findings. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 25-36.
26. Hertwig R, Barron G, Weber EU, Erev I (2004) Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychol Sci 15: 534-539.
27. Houston AI (2009) Flying in the face of nature. Behav Process 80: 295-305.
28. Houston AI, McNamara JM (1982) A sequential approach to risk-taking. Anim Behav 30: 1260-1261.
29. Houston AI, McNamara JM (1985) The choice of two prey types that minimises the probability of starvation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17(2): 135-141.
30. Houston AI, McNamara JM (1989) The value of food: effects of open and closed economies. Anim Behav 37: 546-562.
31. Houston AI, McNamara JM (1999) Models of adaptive behaviour. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
32. Houston AI, Krebs JR, Erichsen JT (1980) Optimal prey choice and discrimination time in the great tit Parus major. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 6: 169-175.
33. Houston AI, Kacelnik A, McNamara JM (1982) Some learning rules for acquiring information. In: McFarland DJ (ed) Functional Ontogeny. Pitman, London, pp 140-191.
34. Houston AI, McNamara JM, Steer MD (2007) Violations of transitivity under fitness maximization. Biol Lett 3: 365-367.
35. Hsu M, Bhatt M, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Camerer CF (2005) Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making. Science 310(5754): 1680-1683.
36. Jackson RR, Pollard SD, Li D, Fijn N (2002) Interpolation variation in the risk-related decisions of Porta labiata, an araneophagic jumping spider (Araneae, Salticidae), during predatory sequences with spitting spiders. Anim Cogn 5: 215-223.
37. Kacelnik A, Bateson M (1996) Risky theories - the effects of variance on foraging decisions. Am Zool 36: 402-434.
38. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1972) Subjective probability: a judgement of representativeness. Cogn Psychol 3: 430-454.
39. Kawamori A, Matsushima T (2010) Subjective value of risky foods for individual domestic chicks: a hierarchical Bayesian model. Anim Cogn 13: 431-441.
40. Klaassen RHG, Nolet BA, van Gils JA, Bauer S (2006) Optimal movement between patches under incomplete information about the spatial distribution of food items. Theor Popul Biol 70: 452-463.
41. Knight FH (1921) Risk. uncertainty and profit. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, pp 43-46.
42. Krebs JR, Kacelnik A, Taylor P (1978) Test of optimal sampling by foraging great tits. Nature 275: 27-31.
43. Lagorio CH, Hackenberg TD (2010) Risky choice in pigeons and humans: a cross-species comparison. J Exp Anal Behav 93: 27-44.
44. Lange A, Dukas R (2009) Bayesian approximations and extensions: optimal decisions for small brains and possibly big ones too. J Theor Biol 259(3): 503-516.
45. Langen TA (1999) How western scrub-jays (Alphelocoma californica) select a nut: effects of the number of options, variation in nut size, and social competition among foragers. Anim Cogn 2: 223-233.
46. Loewenstein G, Lerner JS (2003) The role of affect in decision making. In: Davidson RJ, Scherer KR, Goldsmith HH (eds) Handbook of Affective Sciences. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 619-642.
47. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N (2001) Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 127(2): 267-286.
48. McNamara JM, Dall SRX (2010) Information is a fitness enhancing resource. Oikos 119: 231-236.
49. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1980) The application of statistical decision theory to animal behaviour. J Theor Biol 85: 673-690.
50. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1985) A simple model of information use in the exploitation of patchily distributed food. Anim Behav 33: 553-560.
51. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1987) A general framework for understanding the effects of variability and interruptions on foraging behaviour. Acta Biotheor 36: 3-22.
52. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1992) Risk-sensitive foraging-a review of the theory. Bull Math Biol 54: 355-378.
53. McNamara JM, Houston AI (1997) Currencies for foraging based on energetic gain. Am Nat 150: 603-617.
54. McNamara JM, Houston AI (2009) Integrating function and mechanism. Trends Ecol Evol 24(12): 670-675.
55. McNamara JM, Merad S, Houston AI (1991) A model of risk-sensitive foraging for a reproducing animal. Anim Behav 41: 787-792.
56. McNamara JM, Green RF, Olsson O (2006) Bayes' theorem and its applications in animal behaviour. Oikos 112: 243-251.
57. Mendl M, Burman OHP, Parker RMA, Paul ES (2009) Cognitive bias as an indicator of animal emotion and welfare: emerging evidence and underlying mechanisms. Appl Anim Behav Sci 118: 161-181.
58. Mendl M, Burman OHP, Paul ES (2010) An integrative and functional framework for the study of animal emotion and mood. Proc R Soc B 277: 2895-2904.
59. Mogg K, Bradbury KE, Bradley BP (2006) Interpretation of ambiguous information in clinical depression. Behav Res Ther 44: 1411-1419.
60. Naug D, Arathi HS (2007) Sampling and decision rules used by honey bees in a foraging arena. Anim Cogn 10: 117-124.
61. Nettle D (2004) Adaptive illusions: optimism, control and human rationality. In: Evans D, Cruse P (eds) Emotion, evolution and rationality. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 193-208.
62. Oaksford M, Chater N (2009) Precis of Bayesian rationality: the probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Behav Brain Sci 32: 69-120.
63. Olsson O, Holmgren NMA (1998) The survival-rate-maximizing policy for Bayesian foragers: wait for good news. Behav Ecol 9: 345-353.
64. Olsson O, Wiktander U, Holmgren NMA, Nilsson S (1999) Gaining ecological information about Bayesian foragers through their behaviour. II. A field test with woodpeckers. Oikos 87: 264-276.
65. Ozdenoren E, Peck J (2008) Ambiguity aversion, games against nature, and dynamic consistency. Game Econ Behav 62: 106-115.
66. Parker GA, Maynard Smith J (1990) Optimality theory in evolutionary biology. Nature 348: 27-33.
67. Paul ES, Harding EJ, Mendl M (2005) Measuring emotional processes in animals: the utility of a cognitive approach. Neurosci Biobehav 29: 469-491.
68. Platt ML, Huettel SA (2008) Risky business: the neuroeconomics of decision making under uncertainty. Nature Neurosci 11: 398-403.
69. Pulford BD (2009) Is luck on my side? Optimism, pessimism, and ambiguity aversion. Q J Exp Psychol 62: 1079-1087.
70. Raiffa H (1961) Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms: comment. Q J Econ 75: 690-694.
71. Raiffa H, Schlaifer R (1961) Applied statistical decision theory. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
72. Real L, Caraco T (1986) Risk and foraging in stochastic environments. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17: 371-390.
73. Rilling JK, Sanfey AG, Aronson JA, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD (2004) The neural correlates of theory of mind within interpersonal interactions. NeuroImage 22: 1694-1703.
74. Roberts HV (1963) Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms: comment. Q J Econ 77(2): 327-336.
75. Rode C, Cosmides L, Hell W, Tooby J (1999) When and why do people avoid unknown probabilities in decisions under uncertainty? Testing some predictions from optimal foraging theory. Cognition 72(3): 269-304.
76. Rosati AG, Hare B (2011) Chimpanzees and bonobos distinguish between risk and ambiguity. Biol Lett 7(1): 15-18.
77. Schultz W, Preuschoff K, Camerer C, Hsu M, Fiorillo CD, Tobler PN, Bossaerts P (2008) Explicit neural signals reflecting reward uncertainty. Phil Trans R Soc B 363: 3801-3811.
78. Smith JD, Redford JS, Beran MJ, Washburn DA (2010) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) adaptively monitor uncertainty while multi-tasking. Anim Cogn 13: 93-101.
79. Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
80. Trautmann ST, Vieder FM, Wakker PP (2008) Causes of ambiguity aversion: known versus unknown preferences. J Risk Uncertainty 36: 225-243.
81. Trimmer PC, Houston AI, Marshall JAR, Bogacz R, Paul ES, Mendl MT, McNamara JM (2008) Mammalian choices: combining fast-but-inaccurate and slow-but-accurate decision-making systems. Proc R Soc B 275: 2353-2361.
82. Uehara T, Yokomizo H, Iwasa Y (2005) Mate-choice copying as Bayesian decision making. Am Nat 165(3): 403-410.
83. Valone TJ (2006) Are animals capable of Bayesian updating? An empirical review. Oikos 112: 252-259.
84. van Gils JA, Schenk IW, Bos O, Piersma T (2003) Incompletely informed shorebirds that face a digestive constraint maximize net energy gain when exploiting patches. Am Nat 161: 777-793.
85. Viscusi WK, Magat WA (1992) Bayesian decisions with ambiguous belief aversion. J Risk Uncertainty 5(4): 371-387.
86. Waite TA (2008) Preference for oddity: uniqueness heuristic or hierarchical choice process? Anim Cogn 11: 707-713.
87. Weber EU, Shafir S, Blais AR (2004) Predicting risk sensitivity in humans and lower animals: risk as variance or coefficient of variation. Psychol Rev 111: 430-445.
88. Welton NJ, McNamara JM, Houston AI (2003) Assessing predation risk: optimal behaviour and rules of thumb. Theor Popul Biol 64: 417-430.
89. Zhu L, Gigerenzer G (2006) Children can solve Bayesian problems: the role of representation in mental computation. Cognition 98: 287-308.