Adaptive Risk-Return Control in Motor Planning
Pages 15 - 24
Abstract
Bayesian decision-making theory presumes that humans can maximize the expected gains by trading off risk-returns in a predefined gain function. Recent findings from spatial reaching and coincident timing tasks have challenged this theory by revealing that humans exhibited risk-seeking or risk-aversive rather than risk-neutral tendency (i.e., failed to achieve Bayesian optimality) in asymmetric gain functions (the gain/loss asymmetric to the target time/position). The debate on why these participants’ performances were sub-optimal remains unsettled. In the current paper, we argue that the abrupt change (i.e., gain volatility, a.k.a., risk magnitude) around the optimal point in the gain function, rather than its asymmetry, is a significant factor of this phenomenon, and that sub-optimality is resolved with an “adaptive risk control” where individual participants voluntarily adjust risk-return trade-off through a controllable task variable. We propose that the relationship between risk sensitivity and risk magnitude determines optimal motor planning.
References
[1]
Schoemaker, P.J.: The expected utility model: Its variants, purposes, evidence and limitations. J. Econ. Lit. 20, 529–563 (1982)
[2]
Weise, K., Woger, W.: A Bayesian theory of measurement uncertainty. Meas. Sci. Technol. 4(1), 1–11 (1993).
[3]
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263 (1979).
[4]
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In: Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making: Part I, pp. 99–127 (2013)
[5]
Maloney, L., Landy, M., Trommershäuser, J.: Statistical decision theory and trade-offs in the control of motor response. Spat. Vis. 16(3), 255–275 (2003).
[6]
Trommershäuser, J., Maloney, L.T., Landy, M.S.: Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 20(7), 1419 (2003).
[7]
Trommershäuser J, Gepshtein S, Maloney LT, Landy MS, and Banks MS Optimal compensation for changes in task-relevant movement variability J. Neurosci. 2005 25 31 7169-7178
[8]
Trommershäuser, J., Landy, M.S., Maloney, L.T.: Humans rapidly estimate expected gain in movement planning. Psychol. Sci. 17(11), 981–988 (2006).
[9]
Wu, S.W., Trommershäuser, J., Maloney, L.T., Landy, M.S.: Limits to human movement planning in tasks with asymmetric gain landscapes. J. Vis. 6(1), 5 (2006).
[10]
Ota, K., Shinya, M., Maloney, L.T., Kudo, K.: Sub-optimality in motor planning is not improved by explicit observation of motor uncertainty. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 1–11 (2019).
[11]
Ota, K., Shinya, M., Kudo, K.: Sub-optimality in motor planning is retained throughout 9 days practice of 2250 trials. Sci. Rep. 6(1), 37181 (2016).
[12]
Nagengast, A.J., Braun, D.A., Wolpert, D.M.: Risk sensitivity in a motor task with speed-accuracy trade-off. J. Neurophysiol. 105(6), 2668–2674 (2011).
[13]
Yao, Q., Sakaguchi, Y.: Humans achieve bayesian optimality in controlling risk-return tradeoff of coincident timing task. In: Proceedings of JNNS2018, pp. 24–25 (2018)
[14]
Yao, Q., Sakaguchi, Y.: Humans achieve Bayesian optimality in controlling risk-return tradeoff of spatial reaching task. In: Proceedings of JNNS2019, pp. 59–60 (2019)
[15]
Yao, Q., Sakaguchi, Y.: Optimizing motor timing decision through adaptive risk-return control (2020, submitted)
[16]
Ota, K., Shinya, M., Kudo, K.: Motor planning under temporal uncertainty is suboptimal when the gain function is asymmetric. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 9(9), 88 (2015).
[17]
Aumann, R.J., Serrano, R.: An economic index of riskiness. J. Polit. Econ. 116(5), 810–836 (2008).
[18]
Lejarraga, T., Gonzalez, C.: Effects of feedback and complexity on repeated decisions from description (2011).
[19]
Neyedli, H.F., Welsh, T.N.: People are better at maximizing expected gain in a manual aiming task with rapidly changing probabilities than with rapidly changing payoffs. J. Neurophysiol. 111(5), 1016–1026 (2014).
[20]
Neyedli, H.F., Welsh, T.N.: Optimal weighting of costs and probabilities in a risky motor decision-making task requires experience. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 39(3), 638–645 (2013).
[21]
Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E.U., Erev, I.: Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychol. Sci. 15(8), 534–539 (2004).
[22]
Jessup, R.K., Bishara, A.J., Busemeyer, J.R.: Feedback produces divergence from prospect theory in descriptive choice. Psychol. Sci. 19(10), 1015–1022 (2008).
Recommendations
Firm-Level Productivity, Risk, and Return
This paper provides new evidence about the link between firm-level total factor productivity TFP and stock returns. We estimate firm-level TFP and show that it is strongly related to several firm characteristics such as size, the book-to-market ratio, ...
Volatility Risk Premium, Return Predictability, and ESG Sentiment: Evidence from China’s Spots and Options’ Markets
This study investigates the volatility risk premium on the emerging financial market. We also consider the expected return and ESG sentiment. Based on the SSE 50 ETF 5-minute high-frequency spots and daily options data from 2016 to 2021, we adopt ...
Re-examination of Risk and Return: New Evidence from the Emerging and Transforming Stock Market of China
CSSE '08: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering - Volume 02We examine the hypothesis of risk and return in the emerging and transforming market of China. It is a fundamental concept in finance that is important to investors and portfolio managers. Previous studies reach no consensus on the risk-return ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Nov 2020
843 pages
ISBN:978-3-030-63832-0
DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-63833-7
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Berlin, Heidelberg
Publication History
Published: 18 November 2020
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 09 Feb 2025