Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

The Independence Axiom (IA) of Expected Utility Theory (EUT) is crucial for defining the value representation of risky choice options. With the IA, EUT presents the first of many crucial tests for utility maximization and thus serves as a benchmark for consistent choice under risk. However, the IA is frequently violated, most likely due to subjective weighting of reward probabilities. IA violations have been reported separately in humans and monkeys, but differences in payoff structure compromised comparisons. To overcome these limitations, we used matching payoff structures for the two primate species. Choices in both humans and monkeys violated the IA in a broad range of reward probabilities. In some human participants, the IA violations correlated with those of the monkeys, which indicates a common underlying decision mechanism. In other cases, the IA violations differed between the two species and reflected differences in utility functions: utility was mostly concave in humans but convex in monkeys. These inter-species comparisons provide a basis for future behavioral and neuronal studies addressing the origin of similarities and differences in primates’ decisions under risk.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.jebo.2025.107332

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2025-12-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

240