Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making.
Living organisms need to maintain energetic homeostasis. For many species, this implies taking actions with delayed consequences. For example, humans may have to decide between foraging for high-calorie but hard-to-get, and low-calorie but easy-to-get food, under threat of starvation. Homeostatic pr...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2015-05-01
|
| Series: | PLoS Computational Biology |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004301 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850125520455335936 |
|---|---|
| author | Christoph W Korn Dominik R Bach |
| author_facet | Christoph W Korn Dominik R Bach |
| author_sort | Christoph W Korn |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Living organisms need to maintain energetic homeostasis. For many species, this implies taking actions with delayed consequences. For example, humans may have to decide between foraging for high-calorie but hard-to-get, and low-calorie but easy-to-get food, under threat of starvation. Homeostatic principles prescribe decisions that maximize the probability of sustaining appropriate energy levels across the entire foraging trajectory. Here, predictions from biological principles contrast with predictions from economic decision-making models based on maximizing the utility of the endpoint outcome of a choice. To empirically arbitrate between the predictions of biological and economic models for individual human decision-making, we devised a virtual foraging task in which players chose repeatedly between two foraging environments, lost energy by the passage of time, and gained energy probabilistically according to the statistics of the environment they chose. Reaching zero energy was framed as starvation. We used the mathematics of random walks to derive endpoint outcome distributions of the choices. This also furnished equivalent lotteries, presented in a purely economic, casino-like frame, in which starvation corresponded to winning nothing. Bayesian model comparison showed that--in both the foraging and the casino frames--participants' choices depended jointly on the probability of starvation and the expected endpoint value of the outcome, but could not be explained by economic models based on combinations of statistical moments or on rank-dependent utility. This implies that under precisely defined constraints biological principles are better suited to explain human decision-making than economic models based on endpoint utility maximization. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-425037698d244e91b7ecb9f0a461f7d4 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 1553-734X 1553-7358 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2015-05-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS Computational Biology |
| spelling | doaj-art-425037698d244e91b7ecb9f0a461f7d42025-08-20T02:34:06ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Computational Biology1553-734X1553-73582015-05-01115e100430110.1371/journal.pcbi.1004301Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making.Christoph W KornDominik R BachLiving organisms need to maintain energetic homeostasis. For many species, this implies taking actions with delayed consequences. For example, humans may have to decide between foraging for high-calorie but hard-to-get, and low-calorie but easy-to-get food, under threat of starvation. Homeostatic principles prescribe decisions that maximize the probability of sustaining appropriate energy levels across the entire foraging trajectory. Here, predictions from biological principles contrast with predictions from economic decision-making models based on maximizing the utility of the endpoint outcome of a choice. To empirically arbitrate between the predictions of biological and economic models for individual human decision-making, we devised a virtual foraging task in which players chose repeatedly between two foraging environments, lost energy by the passage of time, and gained energy probabilistically according to the statistics of the environment they chose. Reaching zero energy was framed as starvation. We used the mathematics of random walks to derive endpoint outcome distributions of the choices. This also furnished equivalent lotteries, presented in a purely economic, casino-like frame, in which starvation corresponded to winning nothing. Bayesian model comparison showed that--in both the foraging and the casino frames--participants' choices depended jointly on the probability of starvation and the expected endpoint value of the outcome, but could not be explained by economic models based on combinations of statistical moments or on rank-dependent utility. This implies that under precisely defined constraints biological principles are better suited to explain human decision-making than economic models based on endpoint utility maximization.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004301 |
| spellingShingle | Christoph W Korn Dominik R Bach Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. PLoS Computational Biology |
| title | Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. |
| title_full | Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. |
| title_fullStr | Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. |
| title_short | Maintaining homeostasis by decision-making. |
| title_sort | maintaining homeostasis by decision making |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004301 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christophwkorn maintaininghomeostasisbydecisionmaking AT dominikrbach maintaininghomeostasisbydecisionmaking |