Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39585903›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2024

An inductive bias for slowly changing features in human reinforcement learning.

Noa L Hedrich, Eric Schulz, Sam Hall-McMaster, Nicolas W Schuck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Noa L HedrichMax Planck Research Group NeuroCode, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0009-0006-8620-4486
Eric SchulzMax Planck Research Group Computational Principles of Intelligence, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany.
Sam Hall-McMasterMax Planck Research Group NeuroCode, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Nicolas W SchuckMax Planck Research Group NeuroCode, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0150-8776

Funding

Alexander von Humboldt FellowshipBMBF (Excellence Strategy of the Federal Government and the Länder)Einstein Centre for Neurosciences PhD FellowshipEuropean Research Council Starting
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying goal-relevant features in novel environments is a central challenge for efficient behaviour. We asked whether humans address this challenge by relying on prior knowledge about common properties of reward-predicting features. One such property is the rate of change of features, given that behaviourally relevant processes tend to change on a slower timescale than noise. Hence, we asked whether humans are biased to learn more when task-relevant features are slow rather than fast. To test this idea, 295 human participants were asked to learn the rewards of two-dimensional bandits when either a slowly or quickly changing feature of the bandit predicted reward. Across two experiments and one preregistered replication, participants accrued more reward when a bandit's relevant feature changed slowly, and its irrelevant feature quickly, as compared to the opposite. We did not find a difference in the ability to generalise to unseen feature values between conditions. Testing how feature speed could affect learning with a set of four function approximation Kalman filter models revealed that participants had a higher learning rate for the slow feature, and adjusted their learning to both the relevance and the speed of feature changes. The larger the improvement in participants' performance for slow compared to fast bandits, the more strongly they adjusted their learning rates. These results provide evidence that human reinforcement learning favours slower features, suggesting a bias in how humans approach reward learning.

Indexed as

Reinforcement, PsychologyRewardAdultComputational BiologyFemaleHumansLearningMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39585903
PMCPMC11637442

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.