Literature DB >> 25559114

Information processing as a paradigm for decision making.

Daniel M Oppenheimer1, Evan Kelso.   

Abstract

For decades, the dominant paradigm for studying decision making--the expected utility framework--has been burdened by an increasing number of empirical findings that question its validity as a model of human cognition and behavior. However, as Kuhn (1962) argued in his seminal discussion of paradigm shifts, an old paradigm cannot be abandoned until a new paradigm emerges to replace it. In this article, we argue that the recent shift in researcher attention toward basic cognitive processes that give rise to decision phenomena constitutes the beginning of that replacement paradigm. Models grounded in basic perceptual, attentional, memory, and aggregation processes have begun to proliferate. The development of this new approach closely aligns with Kuhn's notion of paradigm shift, suggesting that this is a particularly generative and revolutionary time to be studying decision science.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision making; information processing; paradigm shift; utility theory

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25559114     DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol        ISSN: 0066-4308            Impact factor:   24.137


  8 in total

1.  Reward Sensitivity Predicts the Response to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Children with Autism and Anxiety.

Authors:  Matthew J Hollocks; Jeffrey J Wood; Eric A Storch; An-Chuen Cho; Connor M Kerns; Philip C Kendall
Journal:  J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol       Date:  2022-01-24

2.  A method for estimating the time of initiating correct categorization in mouse-tracking.

Authors:  David S March; Lowell Gaertner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-04-12

3.  Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The Validity of a New Measure.

Authors:  James M DuBois; John T Chibnall; Raymond C Tait; Jillon S Vander Wal; Kari A Baldwin; Alison L Antes; Michael D Mumford
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-06-14       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  From high- to one-dimensional dynamics of decision making: testing simplifications in attractor models.

Authors:  Martin Schoemann; Stefan Scherbaum
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2020-02-03

Review 5.  Annual Research Review: Transdiagnostic neuroscience of child and adolescent mental disorders--differentiating decision making in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, conduct disorder, depression, and anxiety.

Authors:  Edmund J S Sonuga-Barke; Samuele Cortese; Graeme Fairchild; Argyris Stringaris
Journal:  J Child Psychol Psychiatry       Date:  2015-12-26       Impact factor: 8.982

6.  Noisy preferences in risky choice: A cautionary note.

Authors:  Sudeep Bhatia; Graham Loomes
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Assessing Driving Risk at the Second Phase of Overtaking on Two-Lane Highways for Young Novice Drivers Based on Driving Simulation.

Authors:  Jie Pan; Yongjun Shen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Comparisons Inform Me Who I Am: A General Comparative-Processing Model of Self-Perception.

Authors:  Nexhmedin Morina
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.