Thread by @StePalminteri

Thrilled to share our last paper! In this review article, we discuss why the description-experience gap may constitute a challenge to #neuroeconomics (specifically when comparing human and monkey findings)
with @PagerFM & @FCerrotti
preprint 👉 psyarxiv.com/9s23f/

In description paradigms, payoffs and probabilities (i.e. the decision variables) are given explicitly and symbolically. In experience paradigms, decision variables are never stated and information is acquired a via trial-by-trial feedbacks.

The analysis of the two paradigms results in systematic behavioural discrepancies (the description-experience "gap"). For instance, subjective probabilities follow different deformations and the opposite of loss aversion (loss neglect) is often observed in decision by experience

Back to the issue, the ultimate goal of the 'strong' neuroeconomic agenda's is to replace behavioural descriptive theories with neurobiological plausible mechanistic theories. To do so, a close dialogue between monkey electrophysiologists and human neuroscientists is necessary.

The fact is that monkey electrophysiological studies cannot implement pure description paradigms. The behavioural toolbox ranges from experience to a hybrid mode, with the caveat that monkeys require trial-by-trial feedback to learn the symbolic system (and sustain motivation)

We (and others) believe this explains why why prospect theory-like behavior in monkeys have been only rarely observed. This is, of course, a problem for testing and validating neural models of decision-making under risk using electrophysiological data.

The picture is further complicated by other methodological gaps separating human from monkey
experimental setups, such as the quantity of training, the nature of reward and the size of the stakes.

Actually, even when prospect theory (PT)-like behavior is found in monkeys using some form of the description + experience paradigm, it poses a challenge because with the same set-up PT-like behavior is not observed in humans :
doi.org/10.1037/rev000…
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467…

We conclude insisting that further increasing the methodological overlap between the two species (extensive training in humans, fMRI in monkeys, more ecological set-ups in monkey, etc.) will allow more meaningful between-species translation.

Additional kudos to my co-authors Basile Garcia (@PagerFM) & Fabien Cerrotti (@FCerrotti) for finding the time, strength and concentration to work on this project during the pic of the pandemic 👏💪

(tagging some - the few I found on twitter- monkey electrophysiologists, whose seminal work is cited @MichaelLouisPl1 , @CamilloPadoaSch , @wrstauffern )