Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39088544›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Risk preference as an outcome of evolutionarily adaptive learning mechanisms: An evolutionary simulation under diverse risky environments.

Shogo Homma, Masanori Takezawa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evolutionarily Optimal Risk Aversion.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
  2. Evolving choice hysteresis in reinforcement learning: Comparing the adaptive value of positivity bias and gradual perseveration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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

2 authors.

Shogo HommaDepartment of Behavioral Science, Graduate School of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Masanori TakezawaDepartment of Behavioral Science, Graduate School of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4103-0591

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimization of cognitive and learning mechanisms can reveal complicated behavioral phenomena. In this study, we focused on reinforcement learning, which uses different learning rules for positive and negative reward prediction errors. We attempted to relate the evolved learning bias to the complex features of risk preference such as domain-specific behavior manifests and the relatively stable domain-general factor underlying behaviors. The simulations of the evolution of the two learning rates under diverse risky environments showed that the positive learning rate evolved on average to be higher than the negative one, when agents experienced both tasks where risk aversion was more rewarding and risk seeking was more rewarding. This evolution enabled agents to flexibly choose more reward behaviors depending on the task type. The evolved agents also demonstrated behavioral patterns described by the prospect theory. Our simulations captured two aspects of the evolution of risk preference: the domain-specific aspect, behavior acquired through learning in a specific context; and the implicit domain-general aspect, corresponding to the learning rates shaped through evolution to adaptively behave in a wide range of environments. These results imply that our framework of learning under the innate constraint may be useful in understanding the complicated behavioral phenomena.

Indexed as

LearningRisk-TakingBiological EvolutionComputer SimulationHumansReinforcement, PsychologyReward

Identifiers

PMID39088544
PMCPMC11293680

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.