Revise Introduction

[mdsteiner]

• Make sure to include information about past work, i.e. say how this study is different from others.

• Introduce model a bit better

[ndphillips]

In stating how our work is different from others, make it clear that no other study, to our knowledge, has explored how goals affect decisions under uncertainty, where options and outcomes are a priori unknown (this is true right??)

In introducing the model(s) in the Introduction, you could write the following:

"Both models assume that people make decisions based on summary statistics of the samples they have observed in the past. However, they differ in which summary statistics are used. The EV model only uses the sample mean while the RST model uses both the sample mean and standard deviation. Specifically, while the EV model predicts that people choose the option with the higher observed sample mean, the RST model predicts that people choose the option that is most likely to allow them to reach the goal given the sample mean and standard deviation. In the Results section we will define exactly how this calculation is made.

[mdsteiner]

In stating how our work is different from others, make it clear that no other study, to our knowledge, has explored how goals affect decisions under uncertainty, where options and outcomes are a priori unknown

not sure, I think in the study of Mishra and Lalumiere, 2010 (or maybe it was a different paper, can't remember right now) the outcomes were also unknown but the task was much shorter and I think had a weaker pronounced learning component.

[mdsteiner]

Just found this paper https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00299833?LI=true
We can use it as another example of how foraging under risk in animals works.

Also check this for a review of 59 studies looking at animal foraging
https://academic.oup.com/icb/article/36/4/402/140761

see also
https://academic.oup.com/beheco/article/2/4/301/258129