Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy
Successful design of human-in-the-loop control systems requires appropriate models for human decision makers. Whilst most paradigms adopted in the control systems literature hide the (limited) decision capability of humans, in behavioral economics individual decision making and optimization processe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | arXiv.org 2020-07 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | arXiv.org |
container_volume | |
creator | Protte, Marius Fahr, Rene Quevedo, Daniel E |
description | Successful design of human-in-the-loop control systems requires appropriate models for human decision makers. Whilst most paradigms adopted in the control systems literature hide the (limited) decision capability of humans, in behavioral economics individual decision making and optimization processes are well-known to be affected by perceptual and behavioral biases. Our goal is to enrich control engineering with some insights from behavioral economics research through exposing such biases in control-relevant settings. This paper addresses the following two key questions: 1) How do behavioral biases affect decision making? 2) What is the role played by feedback in human-in-the-loop control systems? Our experimental framework shows how individuals behave when faced with the task of piloting an UAV under risk and uncertainty, paralleling a real-world decision-making scenario. Our findings support the notion of humans in Cyberphysical Systems underlying behavioral biases regardless of -- or even because of -- receiving immediate outcome feedback. We observe substantial shares of drone controllers to act inefficiently through either flying excessively (overconfident) or overly conservatively (underconfident). Furthermore, we observe human-controllers to self-servingly misinterpret random sequences through being subject to a "hot hand fallacy". We advise control engineers to mind the human component in order not to compromise technological accomplishments through human issues. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2429942076</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2429942076</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_24299420763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNi8sKwjAURIMgKNp_uOA6ENPaWpe-cOdC9yXUW5uS5mqSCv69EfwAVzPDmTNiU5mmS77OpJywxPtOCCHzQq5W6ZR1W2zVS5NTBg41Wep17aEhB6ehV5Zry0OL3BA9YEc2ODJwefuAvYc9en23Gzi_0EW10Te0NYKyN4gOtBSg_Y5GGaPq95yNY_OY_HLGFsfDdXfiD0fPAX2oOhqcjaiSmSzLTIoiT_97fQDOv0hM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2429942076</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy</title><source>Free E- Journals</source><creator>Protte, Marius ; Fahr, Rene ; Quevedo, Daniel E</creator><creatorcontrib>Protte, Marius ; Fahr, Rene ; Quevedo, Daniel E</creatorcontrib><description>Successful design of human-in-the-loop control systems requires appropriate models for human decision makers. Whilst most paradigms adopted in the control systems literature hide the (limited) decision capability of humans, in behavioral economics individual decision making and optimization processes are well-known to be affected by perceptual and behavioral biases. Our goal is to enrich control engineering with some insights from behavioral economics research through exposing such biases in control-relevant settings. This paper addresses the following two key questions: 1) How do behavioral biases affect decision making? 2) What is the role played by feedback in human-in-the-loop control systems? Our experimental framework shows how individuals behave when faced with the task of piloting an UAV under risk and uncertainty, paralleling a real-world decision-making scenario. Our findings support the notion of humans in Cyberphysical Systems underlying behavioral biases regardless of -- or even because of -- receiving immediate outcome feedback. We observe substantial shares of drone controllers to act inefficiently through either flying excessively (overconfident) or overly conservatively (underconfident). Furthermore, we observe human-controllers to self-servingly misinterpret random sequences through being subject to a "hot hand fallacy". We advise control engineers to mind the human component in order not to compromise technological accomplishments through human issues.</description><identifier>EISSN: 2331-8422</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ithaca: Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</publisher><subject>Behavioral economics ; Control systems design ; Controllers ; Cyber-physical systems ; Decision making ; Economics ; Feedback ; Optimization</subject><ispartof>arXiv.org, 2020-07</ispartof><rights>2020. This work is published under http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Protte, Marius</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahr, Rene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quevedo, Daniel E</creatorcontrib><title>Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy</title><title>arXiv.org</title><description>Successful design of human-in-the-loop control systems requires appropriate models for human decision makers. Whilst most paradigms adopted in the control systems literature hide the (limited) decision capability of humans, in behavioral economics individual decision making and optimization processes are well-known to be affected by perceptual and behavioral biases. Our goal is to enrich control engineering with some insights from behavioral economics research through exposing such biases in control-relevant settings. This paper addresses the following two key questions: 1) How do behavioral biases affect decision making? 2) What is the role played by feedback in human-in-the-loop control systems? Our experimental framework shows how individuals behave when faced with the task of piloting an UAV under risk and uncertainty, paralleling a real-world decision-making scenario. Our findings support the notion of humans in Cyberphysical Systems underlying behavioral biases regardless of -- or even because of -- receiving immediate outcome feedback. We observe substantial shares of drone controllers to act inefficiently through either flying excessively (overconfident) or overly conservatively (underconfident). Furthermore, we observe human-controllers to self-servingly misinterpret random sequences through being subject to a "hot hand fallacy". We advise control engineers to mind the human component in order not to compromise technological accomplishments through human issues.</description><subject>Behavioral economics</subject><subject>Control systems design</subject><subject>Controllers</subject><subject>Cyber-physical systems</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><issn>2331-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNi8sKwjAURIMgKNp_uOA6ENPaWpe-cOdC9yXUW5uS5mqSCv69EfwAVzPDmTNiU5mmS77OpJywxPtOCCHzQq5W6ZR1W2zVS5NTBg41Wep17aEhB6ehV5Zry0OL3BA9YEc2ODJwefuAvYc9en23Gzi_0EW10Te0NYKyN4gOtBSg_Y5GGaPq95yNY_OY_HLGFsfDdXfiD0fPAX2oOhqcjaiSmSzLTIoiT_97fQDOv0hM</recordid><startdate>20200731</startdate><enddate>20200731</enddate><creator>Protte, Marius</creator><creator>Fahr, Rene</creator><creator>Quevedo, Daniel E</creator><general>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</general><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200731</creationdate><title>Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy</title><author>Protte, Marius ; Fahr, Rene ; Quevedo, Daniel E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_24299420763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Behavioral economics</topic><topic>Control systems design</topic><topic>Controllers</topic><topic>Cyber-physical systems</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Protte, Marius</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fahr, Rene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quevedo, Daniel E</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Protte, Marius</au><au>Fahr, Rene</au><au>Quevedo, Daniel E</au><format>book</format><genre>document</genre><ristype>GEN</ristype><atitle>Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy</atitle><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle><date>2020-07-31</date><risdate>2020</risdate><eissn>2331-8422</eissn><abstract>Successful design of human-in-the-loop control systems requires appropriate models for human decision makers. Whilst most paradigms adopted in the control systems literature hide the (limited) decision capability of humans, in behavioral economics individual decision making and optimization processes are well-known to be affected by perceptual and behavioral biases. Our goal is to enrich control engineering with some insights from behavioral economics research through exposing such biases in control-relevant settings. This paper addresses the following two key questions: 1) How do behavioral biases affect decision making? 2) What is the role played by feedback in human-in-the-loop control systems? Our experimental framework shows how individuals behave when faced with the task of piloting an UAV under risk and uncertainty, paralleling a real-world decision-making scenario. Our findings support the notion of humans in Cyberphysical Systems underlying behavioral biases regardless of -- or even because of -- receiving immediate outcome feedback. We observe substantial shares of drone controllers to act inefficiently through either flying excessively (overconfident) or overly conservatively (underconfident). Furthermore, we observe human-controllers to self-servingly misinterpret random sequences through being subject to a "hot hand fallacy". We advise control engineers to mind the human component in order not to compromise technological accomplishments through human issues.</abstract><cop>Ithaca</cop><pub>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | EISSN: 2331-8422 |
ispartof | arXiv.org, 2020-07 |
issn | 2331-8422 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2429942076 |
source | Free E- Journals |
subjects | Behavioral economics Control systems design Controllers Cyber-physical systems Decision making Economics Feedback Optimization |
title | Behavioral Economics for Human-in-the-loop Control Systems Design: Overconfidence and the hot hand fallacy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T04%3A22%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=document&rft.atitle=Behavioral%20Economics%20for%20Human-in-the-loop%20Control%20Systems%20Design:%20Overconfidence%20and%20the%20hot%20hand%20fallacy&rft.jtitle=arXiv.org&rft.au=Protte,%20Marius&rft.date=2020-07-31&rft.eissn=2331-8422&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2429942076%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2429942076&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |