» Articles » PMID: 37034908

Instruction Effects on Randomness in Sequence Generation

Overview
Journal Front Psychol
Date 2023 Apr 10
PMID 37034908
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Randomness is a fundamental property of human behavior. It occurs both in the form of intrinsic random variability, say when repetitions of a task yield slightly different behavioral outcomes, or in the form of explicit randomness, say when a person tries to avoid being predicted in a game of rock, paper and scissors. Randomness has frequently been studied using random sequence generation tasks (RSG). A key finding has been that humans are poor at deliberately producing random behavior. At the same time, it has been shown that people might be better randomizers if randomness is only an implicit (rather than an explicit) requirement of the task. We therefore hypothesized that randomization performance might vary with the exact instructions with which randomness is elicited. To test this, we acquired data from a large online sample ( = 388), where every participant made 1,000 binary choices based on one of the following instructions: choose either randomly, freely, irregularly, according to an imaginary coin toss or perform a perceptual guessing task. Our results show significant differences in randomness between the conditions as quantified by conditional entropy and estimated Markov order. The randomization scores were highest in the conditions where people were asked to be irregular or mentally simulate a random event (coin toss) thus yielding recommendations for future studies on randomization behavior.

Citing Articles

Active reinforcement learning versus action bias and hysteresis: control with a mixture of experts and nonexperts.

Colas J, ODoherty J, Grafton S PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(3):e1011950.

PMID: 38552190 PMC: 10980507. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011950.


Explaining the flaws in human random generation as local sampling with momentum.

Castillo L, Leon-Villagra P, Chater N, Sanborn A PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(1):e1011739.

PMID: 38181041 PMC: 10796055. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011739.

References
1.
Bode S, Bogler C, Haynes J . Similar neural mechanisms for perceptual guesses and free decisions. Neuroimage. 2012; 65:456-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.064. View

2.
Wang D, Hagger M, Chatzisarantis N . Ironic Effects of Thought Suppression: A Meta-Analysis. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2020; 15(3):778-793. DOI: 10.1177/1745691619898795. View

3.
Gaschler R, Frensch P, Cohen A, Wenke D . Implicit sequence learning based on instructed task set. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2012; 38(5):1389-407. DOI: 10.1037/a0028071. View

4.
Baddeley A, Emslie H, Kolodny J, Duncan J . Random generation and the executive control of working memory. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998; 51(4):819-52. DOI: 10.1080/713755788. View

5.
Heuer H, Janczyk M, Kunde W . Random noun generation in younger and older adults. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009; 63(3):465-78. DOI: 10.1080/17470210902974138. View