Meriam Zid

Abstract How do we make good decisions in uncertain environments? In psychology and neuroscience, the classic view is that we calculate the value of each option, compare them, and choose the most rewarding modulo exploratory noise. An ethologist, conversely, would argue that we commit to one option until its value drops below a threshold and then explore alternatives. Because the fields use incompatible methods, it remains unclear which view better describes human decision-making.

Abstract How do we make good decisions in uncertain environments? In psychology and neuroscience, the classic answer is that we calculate the value of each option and then compare the values to choose the most rewarding, modulo some exploratory noise. An ethologist, conversely, would argue that we commit to one option until its value drops below a threshold, at which point we start exploring other options.