Literature DB >> 18763891

Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing.

Andreas Glöckner1, Tilmann Betsch.   

Abstract

It has been repeatedly shown that in decisions under time constraints, individuals predominantly use noncompensatory strategies rather than complex compensatory ones. The authors argue that these findings might be due not to limitations of cognitive capacity but instead to limitations of information search imposed by the commonly used experimental tool Mouselab (J. W. Payne, J. R. Bettman, & E. J. Johnson, 1988). The authors tested this assumption in 3 experiments. In the 1st experiment, information was openly presented, whereas in the 2nd experiment, the standard Mouselab program was used under different time limits. The results indicate that individuals are able to compute weighted additive decision strategies extremely quickly if information search is not restricted by the experimental procedure. In a 3rd experiment, these results were replicated using more complex decision tasks, and the major alternative explanations that individuals use more complex heuristics or that they merely encode the constellation of cues were ruled out. In sum, the findings challenge the fundaments of bounded rationality and highlight the importance of automatic processes in decision making. (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18763891     DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.5.1055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  26 in total

Review 1.  Reconsidering "evidence" for fast-and-frugal heuristics.

Authors:  Benjamin E Hilbig
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

2.  Multitasking as a choice: a perspective.

Authors:  Laura Broeker; Roman Liepelt; Edita Poljac; Stefan Künzell; Harald Ewolds; Rita F de Oliveira; Markus Raab
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-10-30

3.  The role of subjective linear orders in probabilistic inferences.

Authors:  Rüdiger F Pohl; Benjamin E Hilbig
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-12

Review 4.  Extending multinomial processing tree models to measure the relative speed of cognitive processes.

Authors:  Daniel W Heck; Edgar Erdfelder
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

5.  The Impact of the Mode of Thought in Complex Decisions: Intuitive Decisions are Better.

Authors:  Marius Usher; Zohar Russo; Mark Weyers; Ran Brauner; Dan Zakay
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-03-15

6.  Fast and effective: Intuitive processes in complex decisions.

Authors:  Michael Brusovansky; Moshe Glickman; Marius Usher
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-08

7.  Is Cognitive Impairment Related to Violations of Rationality? A Laboratory Alcohol Intoxication Study Testing Transitivity of Preference.

Authors:  Clintin P Davis-Stober; Denis M McCarthy; Daniel R Cavagnaro; Mason Price; Nicholas Brown; Sanghyuk Park
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2018-07-23

8.  On averages and peaks: how do people integrate attitudes about multiple diseases to reach a decision about multiplex genetic testing?

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh; Christopher H Wade; J Scott Roberts; Sharon Hensley Alford; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-11-05       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Eye tracking and the cognitive reflection test: Evidence for intuitive correct responding and uncertain heuristic responding.

Authors:  Zoe A Purcell; Stephanie Howarth; Colin A Wastell; Andrew J Roberts; Naomi Sweller
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-08-13

Review 10.  Good judgments do not require complex cognition.

Authors:  Julian N Marewski; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Gerd Gigerenzer
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2009-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.