Predictions of human behaviour underpin many important decisions by government and industry. They form a key input to cost benefit analyses for large infrastructure schemes as well as predictions of the impact of new policy measures. These predictions are made using advanced mathematical structures that replicate human decision making and predict changes therein in future hypothetical settings. The need for predictions is ubiquitous to the point that it is hard to think of a single field where models do not form a core part of the analytic toolkit.
While models have been used routinely to predict demand across different fields for several decades, their true potential has been limited by a failure to build synergies across three key methodological disciplines. These three areas all have strengths and weaknesses.
Process modelling (PM) in psychology, neuro-economics, and cognate disciplines focusses on “how” decisions are made, developing models that closely resemble known theories of behaviour, with particular interest in neural correlates, temporal dynamics and incorporating psychometric measurements.
Machine learning (ML) focusses on the “outcome”, replicating current choices or making predictions of changes in behaviour as a function of changing inputs. Increases in computing power have led to a growing popularity of ML techniques.
Choice modelling (CM) is positioned in between PM and ML, relying on structures that make a convenient, but realistic, assumption about the behavioural process, i.e. they fix the “how”, and focus on inferring the “why”, establishing which characteristics influence choices, in what direction, and to what extent. Unlike in PM, the assumptions about the process are driven by trade-offs between behavioural flexibility and computational tractability, large-scale applicability, and policy-relevance. A majority of work relies on random utility maximisation (RUM), producing outputs suitable for economic analysis.
The SYNERGY project will develop a new paradigm for modelling human decision making that addresses the schism between these three key disciplines, leading to new Data-Driven Behavioural Models (DDBMs) that recognise the importance of i) capturing “how” decisions are made, ii) identifying “why” a specific decision is reached, and iii) accurately predicting the “outcome” of future decisions.