Learning reward frequency over reward probability: A tale of two learning rules
preprint
OA: closed
CC-BY-4.0
Abstract
Learning about reward and expected values of choice alternatives is critical for adaptive behavior. Although human choice is affected by the presentation frequency of reward-related alternatives, this is overlooked by some dominant models of value learning. For instance, the delta rule learns average rewards, whereas the decay rule learns cumulative rewards for each option. In a binary-outcome choice task, participants selected between pairs of options that had reward probabilities of .65 (A) versus .35 (B) or .75 (C) versus .25 (D). Crucially, during training there were twice as many AB trials as CD trials, therefore option A was associated with higher cumulative reward, while option C gave higher average reward. Participants then decided between novel combinations of options (e.g., AC). Participants preferred option A, a result predicted by the Decay model, but not the Delta model. This suggests that expected values are based more on total reward than average reward.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-05-22T02:00:06.705733+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0