WeeklySA_AdminPATTERN: Scientists say there are three distinct decision-making types: ‘sensitive’ individuals who learn from punishment, ‘unaware’ individuals who need explicit instruction, and ‘compulsive’ individuals who persist in harmful behaviour…
By Own Correspondent
SYDNEY — Someone continues texting while driving despite multiple tickets, or keeps spending beyond their means despite mounting debt.
While most people learn to avoid behaviours that hurt them, some individuals persist in harmful actions, even when faced with clear negative consequences. New research reveals there are distinct types of people when it comes to learning from punishment, and the differences run much deeper than simple stubbornness.
A study spanning 24 countries has identified three distinct behavioural “phenotypes” that explain why some people adapt to avoid harm while others seem immune to life’s hard lessons. The research challenges common assumptions about human decision-making and reveals that punishment-resistant behaviour stems from specific cognitive deficits rather than moral failings or lack of willpower. The research, published in Communications Psychology, followed 267 participants through an online game designed to measure how people learn from punishment. What emerged was a clear pattern: roughly 26% of participants were “sensitive,” meaning they quickly learned to avoid harmful actions after experiencing negative consequences. About 47% fell into the “unaware” category, showing that they failed to learn from experience alone, but corrected their behaviour once given explicit information about consequences.
Most concerning, 27% were classified as “compulsive,” meaning they persisted in harmful behaviours even after both experiencing punishment and receiving clear information about how to avoid it.
Researchers created an online game called “Planets & Pirates”, where participants could click on two different planets to earn points. Initially, both planets offered equal rewards. But during the punishment phase, clicking on one planet began triggering “pirate attacks” that caused significant point losses, while the other planet remained safe.
Participants were randomly assigned to groups where pirate attacks occurred either frequently (40% of the time) with mild point losses, or rarely (10% of the time) with severe losses. After three rounds of punishment learning, researchers provided explicit corrective information, telling participants exactly which planet attracted pirates and which was safe. They then observed whether this information changed behaviour in a final game round. Sensitive participants figured out the pattern quickly through experience alone. These individuals showed clear behavioural adaptation, shifting their choices away from the punished option and toward the safe alternative during the punishment blocks. They accumulated points throughout the game while others lost them.
Unaware participants seemed oblivious to the connection between their actions and negative outcomes during the initial punishment phase. They continued clicking on both planets equally, losing points in the process. However, once researchers explicitly explained which planet attracted pirates, these individuals immediately corrected their behaviour and avoided further losses.
Most intriguingly, the Compulsive group showed a puzzling disconnect between knowledge and action. Even after receiving the same explicit information as the Unaware group — and demonstrating they understood it by passing comprehension tests — they continued making choices that led to punishment.
Two distinct cognitive failures drive punishment insensitivity. The first, affecting the Unaware group, involves what scientists call “causal inference deficits.” Essentially, these individuals fail to correctly connect their specific actions with negative outcomes. They experience the punishment but can’t figure out what’s causing it.
The second mechanism, affecting the Compulsive group, involves problems with “cognitive-behavioural integration.” These individuals can correctly identify cause-and-effect relationships after receiving information, but struggle to translate that knowledge into behavioural change.
Understanding why experiential learning often fails has broad implications for policy and intervention design. The researchers noted that causal inference deficits may help explain why experiential feedback often fails to drive behaviour change, an insight that sheds light on the limits of punishment-based policies like fines and sanctions.
Perhaps most striking, these behavioural patterns proved remarkably stable. When researchers retested 128 participants six months later, they found the same three phenotypes emerged. A majority of participants maintained their original phenotype classification during retesting, demonstrating the stability of these decision-making styles over time. Behavioural phenotyping at baseline successfully predicted individuals’ learning trajectories and choice patterns six months later—outperforming traditional self-reported measures of cognitive flexibility in forecasting long-term decision-making outcomes. These patterns represent stable, trait-like characteristics rather than temporary behavioural fluctuations.
What This Means for Changing Human Behaviour?
These discoveries illuminate persistent puzzles in human behaviour, from why some people repeatedly engage in risky behaviours despite negative consequences, to why public health campaigns and warning labels often fail to change behaviour in certain populations. For the Unaware group, interventions that provide clear, explicit information about consequences could prove highly effective. These individuals possess intact behavioural control systems: they simply need help connecting the dots between actions and outcomes.
However, the Compulsive group presents a more challenging scenario. Traditional approaches that rely on providing information or increasing punishment severity are likely to prove ineffective. These individuals require interventions that target the disconnect between knowledge and behaviour.
Rather than applying one-size-fits-all solutions, interventions could be tailored to address the specific cognitive mechanisms underlying each person’s punishment insensitivity.
What’s clear is that human decision-making is far more complex than simple cost-benefit calculations. For roughly one in four people, the usual assumption that negative consequences naturally lead to behavioural change simply doesn’t hold true; and addressing this reality requires fundamentally different approaches than society currently employs. – Study Finds
