Concurrent performance in a three-alternative choice situation: Response allocation in a Rock/Paper/Scissors game

Abstract

Adult human subjects engaged in a simulated Rock/Paper/Scissors game against a computer opponent. The computer opponent's responses were determined by programmed probabilities that differed across 10 blocks of 100 trials each. Response allocation in Experiment 1 was well described by a modified version of the generalized matching equation, with undermatching observed in all subjects. To assess the effects of instructions on response allocation, accurate probability-related information on how the computer was programmed to respond was provided to subjects in Experiment 2. Five of 6 subjects played the counter response of the computer's dominant programmed response near-exclusively (e.g., subjects played paper almost exclusively if the probability of rock was high), resulting in minor overmatching, and higher reinforcement rates relative to Experiment 1. On the whole, the study shows that the generalized matching law provides a good description of complex human choice in a gaming context, and illustrates a promising set of laboratory methods and analytic techniques that capture important features of human choice outside the laboratory.