EXPRESS: Variable and sub-optimal responses to a choice problem persist despite experience with a simple and effective decision rule

Choices in a focus-divide dilemma tend to be variable and suboptimal. How readily will people adopt a simple, rational choice rule to improve performance? We asked participants to choose where to stand to throw a beanbag into one of two possible hoops (Experiments 1A, 1B, 1C), and to choose where to fixate to discriminate a target that could appear in one of two possible boxes (Experiment 2). The rational choice follows a simple logic: when hoops/boxes are close together, standing/fixating near their midpoint is optimal. When hoops/boxes are far apart, standing at/fixating one hoop/box will optimize success. We attempted to nudge participants towards optimal choices by providing circumstances in which they carried out the correct solution, and then returning them to the original context to freely choose. In both experiments, participants executed optimal choices during the intervention, and then immediately returned to a sub-optimal pattern of responding when presented with the original context. Experiments 3A and 3B demonstrate the rational decision rule can be easily applied and improves performance. We conclude that variable and idiosyncratic responses are a persistent choice strategy. Borrowing concepts from classic animal learning studies, we suggest rule-following risks missing opportunities for reinforcement learning afforded by choice variability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Published
2026-08-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218261484892
Primary Topic
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

EXPRESS: Variable and sub-optimal responses to a choice problem persist despite experience with a simple and effective decision rule

Josephine Reuther, Alasdair D. F. Clarke, Warren James, Melissa Spilioti et al.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Behavioral and Psychological Studies
article

EXPRESS: Variable and sub-optimal responses to a choice problem persist despite experience with a simple and effective decision rule

Josephine Reuther, Alasdair D. F. Clarke, Warren James, Melissa Spilioti, Amelia Hunt
article en

Abstract

Choices in a focus-divide dilemma tend to be variable and suboptimal. How readily will people adopt a simple, rational choice rule to improve performance? We asked participants to choose where to stand to throw a beanbag into one of two possible hoops (Experiments 1A, 1B, 1C), and to choose where to fixate to discriminate a target that could appear in one of two possible boxes (Experiment 2). The rational choice follows a simple logic: when hoops/boxes are close together, standing/fixating near their midpoint is optimal. When hoops/boxes are far apart, standing at/fixating one hoop/box will optimize success. We attempted to nudge participants towards optimal choices by providing circumstances in which they carried out the correct solution, and then returning them to the original context to freely choose. In both experiments, participants executed optimal choices during the intervention, and then immediately returned to a sub-optimal pattern of responding when presented with the original context. Experiments 3A and 3B demonstrate the rational decision rule can be easily applied and improves performance. We conclude that variable and idiosyncratic responses are a persistent choice strategy. Borrowing concepts from classic animal learning studies, we suggest rule-following risks missing opportunities for reinforcement learning afforded by choice variability.

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
University of Essex (GB), University of Aberdeen (GB), University of Göttingen (DE)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Behavioral and Psychological 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.