Search

In many tasks, human behavior is far noisier than is optimal. Yet when asked to behave randomly, people are typically too predictable. We argue that these apparently contrasting observations have the same origin: the operation of a general-purpose local sampling algorithm for probabilistic inference. This account makes distinctive predictions regarding random sequence generation, not predicted by previous accounts—which suggests that randomness is produced by inhibition of habitual behavior, striving for unpredictability. We verify these predictions in two experiments: people show the same deviations from randomness when randomly generating from non-uniform or recently-learned distributions. In addition, our data show a novel signature behavior, that people's sequences have too few changes of trajectory, which argues against the specific local sampling algorithms that have been proposed in past work with other tasks. Using computational modeling, we show that local sampling where direction is maintained across trials best explains our data, which suggests it may be used in other tasks too. While local sampling has previously explained why people are unpredictable in standard cognitive tasks, here it also explains why human random sequences are not unpredictable enough. Author summary: When explicitly asked to be random, people are not random enough. Previous accounts of these random generation tasks have argued that people are effortfully trying not to be predictable. In many other tasks, however, people also show random behavior, even when it is unnecessary or outright disadvantageous. Here, we try to bridge this apparent gap. We hypothesize that the randomness people produce when trying to be random and the randomness that they display when trying to make the best choice has the same common mechanism: drawing mental samples to make judgments and decisions. In two experiments, we compare previous random generation accounts, which are task-specific in nature, to the more general account of mental sampling that has been used to explain how people behave in many other domains. We find that the flexibility of human random generation in our data is better explained by the mental sampling account. We also find a novel empirical signature of momentum in random generation, which points to a new kind of mental sampling algorithm. If mental sampling governs behavior in random generation tasks and elsewhere, then this task has great promise in helping to understand wider human behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In energy systems' economic models, people's behaviour is often underestimated, and they are generally unaware of how habits impact energy efficiency. Improving efficiency is challenging, and recommendations alone may not be sufficient. Changing behaviour requires understanding the direct impact of needs and habits on energy efficiency. This research introduces a methodology that retrieves human expert knowledge from four key aspects of the current energy transition: everyday appliances, buildings, mobility, flexibility, and energy efficiency. The aim is to examine the causal relationship between energy consumption and human behaviour, gaining a deeper understanding of the links among the factors that drive final energy consumers to change habits through the adoption of energy-saving measures. Working in collaboration with expert panels, this study provides a methodology for extracting expert human knowledge based on a set of future energy transition scenarios aligned with the achievement of the Paris Agreement, a taxonomy of 32 factors that have a strong influence on households' investment decisions, and the results of a survey that characterises the European population through the 32-factor taxonomy and some socioeconomic conditions. In addition, the survey included a sample of the Latin American population to analyse how socioeconomic conditions (region, education, gender, etc.) influence the prioritisation of these factors. We discuss the high priority given to competence and autonomy over financial factors by inhabitants of the European Union residential sector. We provide an analysis of the factors through which other similar projects are focused and on which we converge. In addition, we contribute by presenting the hierarchy of priorities assigned by people. This highlights the importance for policymakers to take these aspects seriously when implementing energy policy interventions that go beyond purely financial measures and fiscal incentives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both the basic human values approach and the economic preference approach have been developed and applied to represent fundamental drivers of human behavior in various domains by measuring people's underlying preferences and motivations. Both of them have been used, however, in isolation from each other, the former primarily in social psychology studies and the latter mainly in economic studies. But how similar are they? Finding that they differ may suggest that combining them to explain human behavior might be beneficial. To the best of our knowledge, only a few studies have attempted to explore and empirically examine the theoretical and empirical link between variables in both approaches. The current study tries to fill this gap by examining relations between basic human values and major economic preferences. We examine the associations between the values of self-transcendence, self-enhancement, openness to change and conservation, and the economic preferences of risk aversion (or seeking), altruism, trust, and positive and negative reciprocity. We propose mechanisms as to how they may be associated with one another. For example, we expect an association between conservation and risk aversion as both are motivated by attributing importance to stability and the status quo, or between self-transcendence and altruism, as both are motivated by concern for others. For the empirical analysis we employed convenience samples collected in Poland and Germany. Results in both samples support our expectations: several values and economic preferences are linked in theoretically predictable ways, but only to a weak or moderate extent. We conclude that they are not mutually exclusive but may rather be complementary, and therefore likely both relevant for investigations into explaining behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding the influence of emotions on social interactions is important for a global understanding of the dynamics of human behavior. In this study, we investigated the interplay between emotions, spontaneous approach or avoidance tendencies, and the regulation of interpersonal distance. Fifty-seven healthy adults participated in a three-part experiment involving exposure to approaching or withdrawing emotional faces (neutral, happy, sad, fearful, disgusted, angry). The sequence began with an initial computerized stop-distance task, followed by a postural task in which participants' approach or avoidance tendencies were quantified via center of pressure (CoP-Y) displacements on a force platform, and concluded with a final computerized stop-distance task. Our findings revealed a gradient in postural responses, with the most forward CoP-Y displacements for neutral and happy faces, indicative of approach tendencies. These were followed by lesser forward displacements for sad and fearful faces, and most pronounced backward displacements for disgusted and angry faces, indicating avoidance. Furthermore, we observed modulations in participants' preferred interpersonal distance based on emotional cues, with neutral and happy faces associated with shorter distances, and disgusted and angry faces linked to larger distances. Despite these similar results, no direct correlation was found between CoP-Y and preferred interpersonal distance, underscoring a dissociation between spontaneous and voluntary social behaviors. These results contribute to a better understanding of how emotional expressions shape social interactions and underscore the importance of considering emotional cues, postural action tendencies, and interpersonal distance in facilitating successful social interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]