People tend to choose solutions not on the basis of rational reasons but more often based on intuition or feelings, claims Ian Krajbich, co-author of the study and associate professor of psychology and economics at the university. Such results run counter to theories that people optimise their choices to maximise outcomes.
Krajbich also offers a simple example of how the results of the study can work in real life. Let's say the fastest way home from work is usually via the main road. Yesterday, however, they started repairing the road, which means traffic delays of several minutes. Instead, you choose a detour and get home a few minutes earlier than you are used to. Some weeks later, when the main road has been repaired, which route will you choose? The main road, which you know is the fastest way? Or the detour which has recently been serving you well?
The results of the study suggest we are often more likely to take the path that worked for us most recently, ignoring the evidence of what works best under normal circumstances. There is a tension between what we should do, at least from a statistically rational point of view, and what we are doing, because of late it has worked out well for us.
Do we make decisions rationally or emotionally?
In the study, participants played a simple computer game, during which they had to click on certain patterns on the screen in order to receive regular rewards. The researchers monitored the movements of a computer mouse to see if participants understood which formula would bring them the highest reward.
For example, participants chose one of two symbols in the upper half of the screen - one at the top left and the other at the top right. Then they moved the cursor to the lower half of the screen, and another symbol appeared in the lower right or left corner, which they clicked to see the reward. Participants repeated the game several times, and the researchers were able to observe whether the participants had learned the formula with the highest reward during the game.
"We found that almost everyone - 56 out of 57 participants - learned the formula. It was no problem for our participants," says Krajbich.
However, the researchers designed part of the study so that the formula which usually led to the greatest reward did not work for part of the game time. Now the question was: how would participants behave after an attempt in which the formula leading to the highest reward did not work? Would they continue to follow the pattern or choose another procedure? The results showed that in six out of 10 cases participants followed the procedure offering the highest reward, namely the pattern that most often did not work, for about 20% of the game time.
In other parts of the study, the pattern that produced the greatest reward always worked the same way. Here, where the pattern was consistent, participants followed it approximately twice as often as in other cases: approximately 40% of the time.
Why don't people follow the best strategy more often?
Although the answer to this question is beyond the scope of this study, the results indicate it is likely that much mental energy and planning is needed to be able always to make decisions based on environmental knowledge. And the rewards for the best strategy are not always obvious - especially if this strategy increases success by only a small percentage.
"It can be difficult to judge whether you have made a good or bad decision based on the result. We can make a good decision and get a bad result by chance. Or we can make a bad decision and be lucky and get a good result," said Krajbich.
In such situations it is easy for people to stop being disciplined and simply choose the solution that paid off last. So the lesson from this study is that people need to learn what works best. "They just have to put this knowledge into practice," he adds.