Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T09:29:18.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theoretical Models of Choice and Strategy Behavior: Stable State Behavior in the Two-Choice Uncertain Outcome Situation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Sidney Siegel
Sidney Siegel*
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A theoretical approach to the understanding of human behavior in uncertain outcome situations is suggested, an approach which draws upon utility theory, decision-making theory, and statistical association theory. Experimental evidence supporting this approach as opposed to alternative approaches is summarized. Three different formalizations are presented, and a variety of experimental tests is suggested.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 1959 , pp. 303 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © 1959 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This paper was written while the author was at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, and it has benefited greatly from discussions with many colleagues there. In particular, some of the features of Models I and II emerged from work with Robert P. Abelson, and Model III was developed to its present state partly as a result of consultations with Claude Shannon, and John C. Harsanyi (of the Department of Economics at Stanford University). The treatment of all three models was sharpened during many discussions with Robert M. Solow.

References

Bernoulli, D. Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Comentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperiales Petropolitanae, 1738, 5, 179–192.Google Scholar
Bush, R. R. and Mosteller, F. Stochastic models for learning, New York: Wiley, 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D., Siegel, S. and Suppes, P. Some experiments and related theory in the measurement of utility and subjective probability. In Davidson, D., Suppes, P., Siegel, S. (Eds.), Decision making: an experimental approach. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1957, 19–81.Google Scholar
Edwards, W. The theory of decision making. Psychol. Bull., 1954, 51, 380–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estes, W. K. Toward a statistical theory of learning. Psychol. Rev., 1950, 57, 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, W. K. Individual behavior in uncertain outcome situations: An interpretation in terms of statistical association theory. In Thrall, R. M., Coombs, C. H., Davis, R. L. (Eds.), Decision processes. New York: Wiley, 1954, 127–137.Google Scholar
Estes, W. K. and Burke, C. J. A theory of stimulus variability in learning. Psychol. Rev., 1953, 60, 276–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estes, W. K. and Straughan, J. H. Analysis of a verbal conditioning situation in terms of statistical learning theory. J. exp. Psychol., 1954, 47, 225–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flood, M. M. Environmental non-stationarity in a sequential decision-making experiment. In Thrall, R. M., Coombs, C. H., Davis, R. L. (Eds.), Decision processes. New York: Wiley, 1954, 287–300.Google Scholar
Galanter, E. and Gerstenhaber, M. On thought: the extrinsic theory. Psychol. Rev., 1956, 63, 218–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodnow, J. J. Determinants of choice distributions in two-choice probability situations. Amer. J. Psychol., 1955, 68, 106–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, D. A., Hake, H. W., and Hornseth, J. P. Acquisition and extinction of a verbal conditioned response with differing percentages of reinforcement. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 42, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hake, H. W. and Hyman, R. Perception of the statistical structure of a random series of binary symbols. J. exp. Psychol., 1953, 45, 64–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humphreys, L. G. Acquisition and extinction of verbal expectation in a situation analogous to conditioning. J. exp. Psychol., 1939, 25, 294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvik, M. E. Probability learning and a negative recency effect in the serial anticipation of alternative symbols. J. exp. Psychol., 1951, 41, 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonckheere, A. R. A distribution-freek-sample test against ordered alternatives. Biometrika, 1954, 41, 133–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messick, S. J. and Solley, C. M. Probability learning in children: some exploratory studies. J. genet. Psychol., 1957, 90, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siegel, S. Behavior in a two-choice uncertain outcome situation under the condition of risk. Unpublished study, Stanford Univ., 1953.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. and Goldstein, D. A.. Decision-making behavior in a two-choice uncertain outcome situation. J. exp. Psychol., 1959, 57, 37–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. A comparison of game theory and learning theory. Psychometrika, 1956, 21, 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toda, M. Guessing sequences under various conditions of payoff. Jap. psychol. Res., 1956, 4, 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O.. Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.), Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1947.Google Scholar