Bias or Optimality? Disentangling Bayesian Inference and Learning Biases in Human Decision-Making
On the map: Deep reinforcement learning methods → Deep RL algorithms and representations
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent studies claim that human behavior in a two-armed Bernoulli bandit (TABB) task is described by positivity and confirmation biases, implying that humans do not integrate new information objectively. However, we find that even if the agent updates its belief via objective Bayesian inference, fitting the standard Q-learning model with asymmetric learning rates still recovers both biases. Bayesian inference cast as an effective Q-learning algorithm has symmetric, though decreasing, learning rates. We explain this by analyzing the stochastic dynamics of these learning systems using master equations. We find that both confirmation bias and unbiased but decreasing learning rates yield the same behavioral signatures. Finally, we propose experimental protocols to disentangle true cognitive biases from artifacts of decreasing learning rates.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Deep RL algorithms and representations, one of 15 directions in Deep reinforcement learning methods. Builds on 0 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2025.
Builds on
0 of 29 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Mitigating Cognitive Bias in RLHF by Altering Rationality
- 2019On the Feasibility of Learning, Rather than Assuming, Human Biases for Reward Inference
- 2022The Boltzmann Policy Distribution: Accounting for Systematic Suboptimality in Human Models
- 2025Evolution favours positively biased reasoning in sequential interactions with high future gains
- 2026What Information Buys in Active Inference
- 2021Uncertain Decisions Facilitate Better Preference Learning
- 2024Sequential sampling without comparison to boundary through model-free reinforcement learning
- 2018Where Do You Think You're Going?: Inferring Beliefs about Dynamics from Behavior