Header logo is


2016


no image
Helping people make better decisions using optimal gamification

Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L.

In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2016 (inproceedings)

Abstract
Game elements like points and levels are a popular tool to nudge and engage students and customers. Yet, no theory can tell us which incentive structures work and how to design them. Here we connect the practice of gamification to the theory of reward shaping in reinforcement learning. We leverage this connection to develop a method for designing effective incentive structures and delineating when gamification will succeed from when it will fail. We evaluate our method in two behavioral experiments. The results of the first experiment demonstrate that incentive structures designed by our method help people make better, less short-sighted decisions and avoid the pitfalls of less principled approaches. The results of the second experiment illustrate that such incentive structures can be effectively implemented using game elements like points and badges. These results suggest that our method provides a principled way to leverage gamification to help people make better decisions.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

2016


link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

2015


no image
When to use which heuristic: A rational solution to the strategy selection problem

Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L.

In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2015 (inproceedings)

Abstract
The human mind appears to be equipped with a toolbox full of cognitive strategies, but how do people decide when to use which strategy? We leverage rational metareasoning to derive a rational solution to this problem and apply it to decision making under uncertainty. The resulting theory reconciles the two poles of the debate about human rationality by proposing that people gradually learn to make rational use of fallible heuristics. We evaluate this theory against empirical data and existing accounts of strategy selection (i.e. SSL and RELACS). Our results suggest that while SSL and RELACS can explain people's ability to adapt to homogeneous environments in which all decision problems are of the same type, rational metareasoning can additionally explain people's ability to adapt to heterogeneous environments and flexibly switch strategies from one decision to the next.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

2015


link (url) Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Children and Adults Differ in their Strategies for Social Learning

Lieder, F., Sim, Z. L., Hu, J. C., Griffiths, T. L., Xu, F.

In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2015 (inproceedings)

Abstract
Adults and children rely heavily on other people’s testimony. However, domains of knowledge where there is no consensus on the truth are likely to result in conflicting testimonies. Previous research has demonstrated that in these cases, learners look towards the majority opinion to make decisions. However, it remains unclear how learners evaluate social information, given that considering either the overall valence, or the number of testimonies, or both may lead to different conclusions. We therefore formalized several social learning strategies and compared them to the performance of adults and children. We find that children use different strategies than adults. This suggests that the development of social learning may involve the acquisition of cognitive strategies.

re

link (url) [BibTex]

link (url) [BibTex]


no image
Learning from others: Adult and child strategies in assessing conflicting ratings

Hu, J., Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L., Xu, F.

In Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2015 (inproceedings)

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
Utility-weighted sampling in decisions from experience

Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L., Hsu, M.

In The 2nd Multidisciplinary Conference on Reinforcement Learning and Decision Making, 2015 (inproceedings)

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]