Empirical Analysis of the Sequential Election Model in Humans

The outcomes reported comparing the behavior of human and non-human animals in choice procedures are sometimes contradictory. Two different hypotheses have been stated: (i) that natural selection has favored different choice processes, or (ii) we cannot compare the performance of human and non-human animals in experimental protocols due to the differing particularities
of the protocols used in each case. In humans, there is a clear correlation between the number of alternatives that compose the context of choice and the latency of response. Higher latencies are observed as the number of alternatives increases. This evidence has supported the hypothesis that organisms compare alternatives before making choices. Nevertheless, recent results using Sturnus vulgaris as subjects have reported different results. The Sequential Choice Model (SCM) has been  proposed to account for these data. This model does not assume a process of comparison. Even more importantly, it allows for moment-to-moment predictions in situations of choice. We developed an experimental protocol to be used with humans that reproduces the properties of situations of choice usually considered with non-human animals. The results partially support the predictions of the Sequential Choice Model, but it is not possible to discard a comparison mechanism in situations of choice faced by humans.

Keywords: Choice, sequential choice model, latency,valuation, comparison process.