Propensities and Second Order Uncertainty: A Modified Taxi Cab Problem

Dewitt, Stephen; Fenton, Norman; Liefgreen, Alice; Lagnado, David A.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.503233

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The implication here is that the individual is aware of the underlying probabilities, that is, of estimable risk. Such a view assumes that the individual has reasonable knowledge of the objective probability of the outcome (Dewitt et al, 2020 ) and that this probability is sufficiently stable to inform future choice: they appreciate the aleatory uncertainty involved, and their decision to approach or avoid the cat is a response to calculated risk. According to this account, tolerance of uncertainty is driven by the extent to which the individual feels averse to the odds of an unfavourable outcome and the extent to which they accept this risk.…”

Section: Uncertainty Aversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aversion, interpretation and determinability: Three factors of uncertainty that may play a role in psychopathology

Moul

Don

Livesey

2023

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This opinion piece considers the construct of tolerance of uncertainty and suggests that it should be viewed in the context of three psychological factors: uncertainty aversion, uncertainty interpretation, and uncertainty determinability. Uncertainty aversion refers to a dislike of situations in which the outcomes are not deterministic and is similar to conventional conceptions of (in)tolerance of uncertainty. Uncertainty interpretation refers to the extent to which variability in an observed outcome is interpreted as random fluctuation around a relatively stable base-rate versus frequent and rapid changes in the base-rate. Uncertainty determinability refers to the (actual or perceived) capacity of the individual to generate any meaningful expectancy of the uncertain outcome, which may be undeterminable if predictions are updated too quickly. We argue that uncertainty interpretation and determinability are psychological responses to the experience of probabilistic events that vary among individuals and can moderate negative affect experienced in response to uncertainty. We describe how individual differences in basic parameters of associative learning (modelled by a simple learning window) could lead to this variation. To explain these hypotheses, we utilise the distinction between aleatory uncertainty (the inherent unpredictability of individual stochastic events) and epistemic uncertainty (obtainable knowledge that the individual lacks or perceives to be lacking). We argue that when expectancies are updated quickly, epistemic uncertainty will dominate the individual’s representation of the events around them, leading to a subjective experience of the world as one that is volatile and unpredictable.

show abstract

Section: Uncertainty Aversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aversion, interpretation and determinability: Three factors of uncertainty that may play a role in psychopathology

Moul

Don

Livesey

2023

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the time we have taken to dig into the dynamics of the model will be valuable for the remainder of the paper, the key outcome for present purposes is that the mean ME‐propensity for both X and Y increase following the explosion (sometimes equally, sometimes not, depending on the particular frequencies used). In an earlier exploratory study of updating propensities (Dewitt, Fenton, Liefgreen, & Lagnado, 2020), we told participants in a modified version of the taxi cab problem that the witness had been tested five times, correctly identifying the cab color four times (rather than just providing this as a fixed 80% as in the original) and also requested them to update their estimate of the witness's accuracy after they report the cab is blue. While this should go down, because their report is in opposition to the only other evidence that 85% of cabs are green, around a quarter of our participants in fact increased their estimate of the witness's accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Categorical Updating in a Bayesian Propensity Problem

Dewitt,

Adler,

et al. 2023

Cognitive Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present three experiments using a novel problem in which participants update their estimates of propensities when faced with an uncertain new instance. We examine this using two different causal structures (common cause/common effect) and two different scenarios (agent-based/mechanical). In the first, participants must update their estimate of the propensity for two warring nations to successfully explode missiles after being told of a new explosion on the border between both nations. In the second, participants must update their estimate of the accuracy of two early warning tests for cancer when they produce conflicting reports about a patient. Across both experiments, we find two modal responses, representing around one-third of participants each. In the first, "Categorical" response, participants update propensity estimates as if they were certain about the single event, for example, certain that one of the nations was responsible for the latest explosion, or certain about which of the two tests is correct. In the second, "No change" response, participants make no update to their propensity estimates at all. Across the three experiments, the theory is developed and tested that these two responses in fact have a single representation of the problem: because the actual outcome is binary (only one of the nations could have launched the missile; the patient either has cancer or not), these participants believe it is incorrect to update propensities in a graded manner. They therefore operate on a "certainty threshold" basis, whereby, if they are certain enough about the single event, they will make the "Categorical" response, and if they are below this threshold, they will make the "No change" response. Ramifications are considered for the "categorical" response in particular, as this approach

show abstract

A graphical study of comparative probabilities

Erreygers

Miranda

2021

Journal of Mathematical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Propensities and Second Order Uncertainty: A Modified Taxi Cab Problem

Cited by 3 publications

References 26 publications

Aversion, interpretation and determinability: Three factors of uncertainty that may play a role in psychopathology

Aversion, interpretation and determinability: Three factors of uncertainty that may play a role in psychopathology

Categorical Updating in a Bayesian Propensity Problem

A graphical study of comparative probabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About