Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs are capable of reproducing non-rational human choice biases and can exhibit decision behaviors consistent with prospect-theoretic effects under uncertainty, and suggest that generative AI models may provide a scalable alternative for modeling human decision processes.
Abstract
Human choice behavior, including route choice, exhibits systematic behavioral biases that deviate from the assumptions of full rationality. Cumulative prospect theory (CPT) has been widely recognized as an effective framework for characterizing such behavioral patterns. However, its large-scale application, particularly in simulation and agent-based modeling, critically depends on specifying individual-level CPT parameters, which remain a major bottleneck. Conventional approaches typically rely on surveys and controlled experiments to calibrate CPT parameters, yet these methods are difficult to generalize and often fail to capture the full diversity of human decision-making. To address this challenge, this paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can reproduce human behavioral biases in choice-making without explicit specification of prospect-theoretic parameters. Using route choice as a representative scenario, we design a behavioral evaluation framework and systematically compare LLM-generated decisions with established human behavioral patterns predicted by CPT. Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs are capable of reproducing non-rational human choice biases and can exhibit decision behaviors consistent with prospect-theoretic effects under uncertainty. These findings suggest that generative AI models may provide a scalable alternative for modeling human decision processes and offer a promising foundation for next-generation large-scale agent-based simulation and AI-driven behavioral research.
BBT outperforms traditional approaches at predicting human behavior while also revealing psychological insights, resulting in models that can both mimic Bayesian priors and capture heuristics and biases that violate simple modeling assumptions.
Brenden M. Lake, A. Jagadish, Guang-Yuan Jiang· 0 citations
Large language models act as strategic agents and models of human choice, yet choosing like a strategic agent does not mean computing like one. We recorded activations from four open-weight models --- dense and mixture-of-experts, including a matched base--instruct pair --- in one-shot play of 144 strict ordinal $2\tim...
A conserved latent reward-learning strategy is identified in mice and humans characterized by the greatest feedback sensitivity, reward efficiency, and adaptation after reversal, defining a translational framework for studying how adaptive decision-making is shaped by task experience, stress, affective processes, and n...
Zahra Rostami, Hadi Choubdar Parvin, E. Iyer et al.· bioRxiv· 0 citations
This work presents a data-driven method—the choice-wide behavioral association study: CBAS—that systematically identifies such behavioral features that either significantly differ between groups or correlate with a covariate of interest.
David B. Kastner, Nicole O. Yokota, Christina Y. Lee et al.· bioRxiv· 2 citations
The Choice-Wide Behavioral Association Study is introduced, which identifies interpretable behavioral components and reveals previously unrecognized features of behavior across flies, rats, and humans.
David B. Kastner, Nicole O. Yokota, Christina Y. Lee et al.· Nature Communications· 0 citations
It is proved that Condorcet cycles exist with probability converging to one exponentially fast under a general probabilistic preference model called the Luce model, thereby demonstrating the impossibility of fully aligning human preferences using reward-based approaches such as reinforcement learning from human feedbac...
Kaizhao Liu, Qi Long, Zhekun Shi et al.· Annals of Statistics· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.