ArticleScientific reports2024
A multi-stage anticipated surprise model with dynamic expectation for economic decision-making.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are many modeling works that aim to explain people's behaviors that violate classical economic theories. However, these models often do not take into full account the multi-stage nature of real-life problems and people's tendency in solving complicated problems sequentially. In this work, we propose a descriptive decision-making model for multi-stage problems with perceived post-decision information. In the model, decisions are chosen based on an entity which we call the 'anticipated surprise'. The reference point is determined by the expected value of the possible outcomes, which we assume to be dynamically changing during the mental simulation of a sequence of events. We illustrate how our formalism can help us understand prominent economic paradoxes and gambling behaviors that involve multi-stage or sequential planning. We also discuss how neuroscience findings, like prediction error signals and introspective neuronal replay, as well as psychological theories like affective forecasting, are related to the features in our model. This provides hints for future experiments to investigate the role of these entities in decision-making.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.