EXPRESS: People can adaptively exploit model-free and model-based reinforcement learning in competitive games

A key goal for organisms in competitive social interactions is learning strategies that outperform opponents. Despite the ample literature on modeling strategic behaviors in games, little research has parametrically examined the degree to which individuals' performance and strategy depends on an opponent's predictability and how they change over time. To test these questions, we conducted two experiments investigating peoples' behavior in the competitive game Rock, Paper, Scissors against computerized opponents programmed using reinforcement learning algorithms. In Experiment 1, the RL algorithms were model-free, where only the values of selected actions were updated following feedback. In Experiment 2, the algorithms were model-based, where the values of unselected actions were also updated. Results from both experiments showed that subjects significantly outperformed both classes of RL opponents, but they implemented different strategies to do so. Specifically, participants tended to engage in a Win-Stay/Lose-Shift strategy in Experiment 1 but a Win-Shift/Lose-Shift strategy in Experiment 2, contrary to behaviors predicted by typical RL models and learning theories. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of shifting away from reinforced behaviors, reinforcement learning as a representative computational framework of strategic decision-making, and how future research can continue this investigation by testing additional models and competitive games.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Published
2026-03-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218261437211
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

EXPRESS: People can adaptively exploit model-free and model-based reinforcement learning in competitive games

Brian C. Howatt, Michael E. Young
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

EXPRESS: People can adaptively exploit model-free and model-based reinforcement learning in competitive games

Brian C. Howatt, Michael E. Young
article en

Abstract

A key goal for organisms in competitive social interactions is learning strategies that outperform opponents. Despite the ample literature on modeling strategic behaviors in games, little research has parametrically examined the degree to which individuals' performance and strategy depends on an opponent's predictability and how they change over time. To test these questions, we conducted two experiments investigating peoples' behavior in the competitive game Rock, Paper, Scissors against computerized opponents programmed using reinforcement learning algorithms. In Experiment 1, the RL algorithms were model-free, where only the values of selected actions were updated following feedback. In Experiment 2, the algorithms were model-based, where the values of unselected actions were also updated. Results from both experiments showed that subjects significantly outperformed both classes of RL opponents, but they implemented different strategies to do so. Specifically, participants tended to engage in a Win-Stay/Lose-Shift strategy in Experiment 1 but a Win-Shift/Lose-Shift strategy in Experiment 2, contrary to behaviors predicted by typical RL models and learning theories. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of shifting away from reinforced behaviors, reinforcement learning as a representative computational framework of strategic decision-making, and how future research can continue this investigation by testing additional models and competitive games.

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Kansas State University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.