98%
921
2 minutes
20
In value-based decision-making there is wide behavioural variability in how individuals respond to uncertainty. Maladaptive responses to uncertainty have been linked to a vulnerability to mental illness, for example, between risk aversion and affective disorders. Here, we examine individual differences in risk sensitivity when subjects confront options drawn from different value distributions, where these embody the same or different means and variances. In simulations, we show that a model that learns a distribution using Bayes' rule and reads out different parts of the distribution under the influence of a risk-sensitive parameter (Conditional Value at Risk, CVaR) predicts how likely an agent is to prefer a broader over a narrow distribution (pro-variance bias/risk-seeking) under the same overall means. Using empirical data, we show that CVaR estimates correlate with participants' pro-variance biases better than a range of alternative parameters derived from other models. Importantly, across two independent samples, CVaR estimates and participants' pro-variance bias negatively correlated with trait rumination, a common trait in depression and anxiety. We conclude that a Bayesian-CVaR model captures individual differences in sensitivity to variance in value distributions and task-independent trait dispositions linked to affective disorders.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11342847 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/cpsy.114 | DOI Listing |
Comput Psychiatr
January 2025
Max Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London WC1B 5EH, United Kingdom.
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.5334/cpsy.114.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComput Psychiatr
August 2024
Max Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London WC1B 5EH, UK.
In value-based decision-making there is wide behavioural variability in how individuals respond to uncertainty. Maladaptive responses to uncertainty have been linked to a vulnerability to mental illness, for example, between risk aversion and affective disorders. Here, we examine individual differences in risk sensitivity when subjects confront options drawn from different value distributions, where these embody the same or different means and variances.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFElife
September 2020
Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Decision-making biases can be features of normal behaviour, or deficits underlying neuropsychiatric symptoms. We used behavioural psychophysics, spiking-circuit modelling and pharmacological manipulations to explore decision-making biases during evidence integration. Monkeys showed a pro-variance bias (PVB): a preference to choose options with more variable evidence.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF