Rational vigilance of intentions and incentives guides learning from advice
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
People vigilantly evaluate advice: they seek to learn from competent and well-intentioned informants, while ignoring incompetent or manipulative ones. Yet the mechanisms that support vigilance of informants' motivations remain poorly-understood. For instance, how do people combine informants' incentives and intentions when evaluating testimony---through rational inference, or simple heuristics? To answer such questions, here we develop a rational model of vigilance and test its predictions in two pre-registered online experiments with participants in the U.S (Ns = 626, 555). Across financial, real estate, and medical decision scenarios, participants' inferences closely tracked our model’s predictions: participants discounted advice when selfish speakers benefited from manipulating them, and this discounting was attenuated by perceived benevolence. When pay-offs were shared, incentives increased trust, as our rational model---but not simple heuristics---predict. Our rational analysis thus establishes a formal framework for vigilance of motivations that also sheds light on phenomena from persuasion to polarization.
