Literature DB >> 20092816

Decisions from experience: why small samples?

Ralph Hertwig1, Timothy J Pleskac.   

Abstract

In many decisions we cannot consult explicit statistics telling us about the risks involved in our actions. In lieu of such data, we can arrive at an understanding of our dicey options by sampling from them. The size of the samples that we take determines, ceteris paribus, how good our choices will be. Studies of decisions from experience have observed that people tend to rely on relatively small samples from payoff distributions, and small samples are at times rendered even smaller because of recency. We suggest one contributing and previously unnoticed reason for reliance on frugal search: Small samples amplify the difference between the expected earnings associated with the payoff distributions, thus making the options more distinct and choice easier. We describe the magnitude of this amplification effect, and the potential costs that it exacts, and we empirically test four of its implications. Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20092816     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.12.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  16 in total

Review 1.  Maximization, learning, and economic behavior.

Authors:  Ido Erev; Alvin E Roth
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  When and why rare events are underweighted: a direct comparison of the sampling, partial feedback, full feedback and description choice paradigms.

Authors:  Adrian R Camilleri; Ben R Newell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-04

3.  Salience driven value integration explains decision biases and preference reversal.

Authors:  Konstantinos Tsetsos; Nick Chater; Marius Usher
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Social sampling and expressed attitudes: Authenticity preference and social extremeness aversion lead to social norm effects and polarization.

Authors:  Gordon D A Brown; Stephan Lewandowsky; Zhihong Huang
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Perceptuo-motor, cognitive, and description-based decision-making seem equally good.

Authors:  Andreas Jarvstad; Ulrike Hahn; Simon K Rushton; Paul A Warren
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Information sampling behavior with explicit sampling costs.

Authors:  Mordechai Z Juni; Todd M Gureckis; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2016-07

7.  Decisions from experience: adaptive information search and choice in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Julia Spaniol; Pete Wegier
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 4.677

8.  A Generative View of Rationality and Growing Awareness.

Authors:  Teppo Felin; Jan Koenderink
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-07

9.  Reinforcement learning modulates the stability of cognitive control settings for object selection.

Authors:  Anthony W Sali; Brian A Anderson; Steven Yantis
Journal:  Front Integr Neurosci       Date:  2013-12-18

10.  Influence of an Intermediate Option on the Description-Experience Gap and Information Search.

Authors:  Neha Sharma; Shoubhik Debnath; Varun Dutt
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-03-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.