Experiential values are underweighted in decisions involving symbolic options

Standard models of decision-making assume each option is associated with subjective value, regardless of whether this value is inferred from experience (experiential) or explicitly instructed probabilistic outcomes (symbolic). In this study, we present results that challenge the assumption of unified representation of experiential and symbolic value. Across nine experiments, we presented participants with hybrid decisions between experiential and symbolic options. Participants' choices exhibited a pattern consistent with a systematic neglect of the experiential values. This normatively irrational decision strategy held after accounting for alternative explanations, and persisted even when it bore an economic cost. Overall, our results demonstrate that experiential and symbolic values are not symmetrically considered in hybrid decisions, suggesting they recruit different representational systems that may be assigned different priority levels in the decision process. These findings challenge the dominant models commonly used in value-based decision-making research.

Automated summary

Standard models assume that subjective value is associated with each option, regardless of whether it is inferred from experience or explicitly instructed. However, this study challenges the assumption of unified representation of experiential and symbolic value. Through nine experiments, participants' choices showed a systematic neglect of experiential values. This normatively irrational decision strategy persisted even when alternative explanations were considered and had an economic cost. Overall, these findings challenge the dominant models commonly used in value-based decision-making research.