Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34568979›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2022

Comparing utility functions between risky and riskless choice in rhesus monkeys.

Philipe M Bujold, Leo Chi U Seak, Wolfram Schultz, Simone Ferrari-Toniolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Worth the Work? Monkeys Discount Rewards by a Subjective Adapting Effort Cost.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  4. Reward Value Revealed by Auction in Rhesus Monkeys.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Philipe M BujoldDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3DY, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2901-003X
Leo Chi U SeakDepartment of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3DY, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8188-6891
Wolfram Schultz *Department of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3DY, UK. Wolfram.Schultz@Protonmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8530-4518
Simone Ferrari-Toniolo *Department of Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3DY, UK. Simone.FerrariToniolo@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9009-0764

Funding

European Research Council 293549Wellcome Trust 204811/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust WT 095495Wellcome Trust WT 204811
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decisions can be risky or riskless, depending on the outcomes of the choice. Expected utility theory describes risky choices as a utility maximization process: we choose the option with the highest subjective value (utility), which we compute considering both the option's value and its associated risk. According to the random utility maximization framework, riskless choices could also be based on a utility measure. Neuronal mechanisms of utility-based choice may thus be common to both risky and riskless choices. This assumption would require the existence of a utility function that accounts for both risky and riskless decisions. Here, we investigated whether the choice behavior of two macaque monkeys in risky and riskless decisions could be described by a common underlying utility function. We found that the utility functions elicited in the two choice scenarios were different from each other, even after taking into account the contribution of subjective probability weighting. Our results suggest that distinct utility representations exist for risky and riskless choices, which could reflect distinct neuronal representations of the utility quantities, or distinct brain mechanisms for risky and riskless choices. The different utility functions should be taken into account in neuronal investigations of utility-based choice.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorRisk-TakingAnimalsBrainDecision MakingMacaca mulattaProbabilityDecision-makingEconomic choiceGamblePreferenceProspect theory

Identifiers

PMID34568979
PMCPMC8940808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.