
Abstract We experimentally test a theory of risky choice in which the perception of a lottery payoff is noisy due to information processing constraints in the brain. We model perception using the principle of efficient coding, which implies that perception is most accurate for those payoffs that occur most frequently. Across two preregistered laboratory experiments, we manipulate the distribution from which payoffs in the choice set are drawn. In our first experiment, we find that risk taking is more sensitive to payoffs that are presented more frequently. In a follow-up task, we incentivize subjects to classify which of two symbolic numbers is larger. Subjects exhibit higher accuracy and faster response times for numbers they have observed more frequently. In our second experiment, we manipulate the payoff distribution so that efficient coding modulates the strength of valuation biases. As we experimentally increase the frequency of large payoffs, we find that subjects perceive the upside of a risky lottery more accurately and take greater risk. Together, our experimental results suggest that risk taking depends systematically on the payoff distribution to which the decision maker’s perceptual system has recently adapted. More broadly, our findings highlight the importance of imprecise and efficient coding in economic decision making.
neuroeconomics, Economics and Econometrics, Judgment and Decision Making, 330, efficient coding, risky choice, Cognitive Psychology, perception, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Biases, Framing, and Heuristics
neuroeconomics, Economics and Econometrics, Judgment and Decision Making, 330, efficient coding, risky choice, Cognitive Psychology, perception, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Biases, Framing, and Heuristics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 111 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
