Implicit Counterfactual Effect in Partial Feedback Reinforcement Learning: Behavioral and Modeling Approach.

Context remarkably affects learning behavior by adjusting option values according to the distribution of available options. Displaying counterfactual outcomes, the outcomes of the unchosen option alongside the chosen one (i.e., providing complete feedback), would increase the contextual effect by inducing participants to compare the two outcomes during learning. However, when the context only consists of the juxtaposition of several options and there is no such explicit counterfactual factor (i.e., only partial feedback is provided), it is not clear whether and how the contextual effect emerges. In this research, we employ Partial and Complete feedback paradigms in which options are associated with different reward distributions. Our modeling analysis shows that the model that uses the outcome of the chosen option for updating the values of both chosen and unchosen options in opposing directions can better account for the behavioral data. This is also in line with the diffusive effect of dopamine on the striatum. Furthermore, our data show that the contextual effect is not limited to probabilistic rewards, but also extends to magnitude rewards. These results suggest that by extending the counterfactual concept to include the effect of the chosen outcome on the unchosen option, we can better explain why there is a contextual effect in situations in which there is no extra information about the unchosen outcome.

Healthy decisions in the cued-attribute food choice paradigm have high test-retest reliability.

Food choice paradigms are commonly used to study decision mechanisms, individual differences, and intervention efficacy. Here, we measured behavior from twenty-three healthy young adults who completed five repetitions of a cued-attribute food choice paradigm over two weeks. This task includes cues prompting participants to explicitly consider the healthiness of the food items before making a selection, or to choose naturally based on whatever freely comes to mind. We found that the average patterns of food choices following both cue types and ratings about the palatability (i.e. taste) and healthiness of the food items were similar across all five repetitions. At the individual level, the test-retest reliability for choices in both conditions and healthiness ratings was excellent. However, test-retest reliability for taste ratings was only fair, suggesting that estimates about palatability may vary more from day to day for the same individual.