The shadowing effect of initial expectation on learning asymmetry
Abstract
Evidence for positivity and optimism bias abounds in high-level belief updates. However, no consensus has been reached regarding whether learning asymmetries exists in more elementary forms of updates such as reinforcement learning (RL). In RL, the learning asymmetry concerns the sensitivity difference in incorporating positive and negative prediction errors (PE) into value estimation, namely the asymmetry of learning rates associated with positive and negative PEs. Although RL has been established as a canonical framework in interpreting agent and environment interactions, the direction of the learning rate asymmetry remains controversial. Here, we propose that part of the controversy stems from the fact that people may have different value expectations before entering the learning environment. Such default value expectation influences how PEs are calculated and consequently biases subjects choices. We test this hypothesis in two learning experiments with stable or varying reinforcement probabilities, across monetary gains, losses and gain-loss mixtures environments. Our results consistently support the model incorporating asymmetric learning rates and initial value expectation, highlighting the role of initial expectation in value update and choice preference. Further simulation and model parameter recovery analyses confirm the unique contribution of initial value expectation in accessing learning rate asymmetry. Author SummaryWhile RL model has long been applied in modeling learning behavior, where value update stands in the core of the learning process, it remains controversial whether and how learning is biased when updating from positive and negative PEs. Here, through model comparison, simulation and recovery analyses, we show that accurate identification of learning asymmetry is contingent on taking into account of subjects default value expectation in both monetary gain and loss environments. Our results stress the importance of initial expectation specification, especially in studies investigating learning asymmetry.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Asymmetric Reinforcement Learning Explains Human Choice Patterns in Decision-making Under Risk
Niloufar Shahdoust, Rhiannon L Cowan, … Elliot H. Smith·bioRxiv·Mar 11, 2026
- Choosing and learning: outcome valence differentially affects learning from free versus forced choices
Valérian Chambon, Héloïse Théro, … Stefano Palminteri·bioRxiv·Sep 4, 2019
- Valence biases factual and counterfactual learning in opposite directions
Stefano Palminteri, Germain Lefebvre, … Sarah‐Jayne Blakemore·PLoS Computational BiologyPeer-reviewed·Aug 11, 2017
- Confirmation bias optimizes reward learning
T. Tarantola, T. Folke, … B. De Martino·bioRxiv·Feb 27, 2021
- Optimal Reinforcement Learning with Asymmetric Updating in Volatile Environments: a Simulation Study
Mojtaba Rostami Kandroodi, Abdol‐Hossein Vahabie, … Majid Nili Ahmadabadi·bioRxiv·Feb 15, 2021
- A normative account of confirmation bias during reinforcement learning
G. Lefebvre, C. Summerfield, R. Bogacz·bioRxiv·May 12, 2020