Literature DB >> 29698025

Taxing cognitive capacities reduces choice consistency rather than preference: A model-based test.

Sebastian Olschewski1, Jörg Rieskamp1, Benjamin Scheibehenne2.   

Abstract

How do people make preferential choices in situations where their cognitive capacities are limited? Many studies link the manipulation of cognitive resources to qualitative changes in preferences. However, there is a widely overlooked alternative hypothesis, namely, that a reduction in cognitive capacities leads to an increase in choice inconsistency. We developed a mathematical model and followed a hierarchical Bayesian estimation approach to test to what extent a reduction in cognitive capacities leads to a shift in preference or an increase in choice inconsistency. Using a within-subject n-back task to manipulate cognitive load, we conducted three experiments across different choice domains: risky choice, temporal discounting, and strategic interaction. Across all three domains, results show that a reduction in cognitive capacities predominantly affected participants' level of choice consistency rather than their respective preference. These results hold on an individual and a group level. In sum, our approach and the mathematical model we used provide a rigorous and general test of how reduced cognitive capacities affect people's decision-making. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29698025     DOI: 10.1037/xge0000403

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  9 in total

1.  Neural and behavioral correlates of episodic memory are associated with temporal discounting in older adults.

Authors:  Karolina M Lempert; Dawn J Mechanic-Hamilton; Long Xie; Laura E M Wisse; Robin de Flores; Jieqiong Wang; Sandhitsu R Das; Paul A Yushkevich; David A Wolk; Joseph W Kable
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2020-07-02       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Delay discounting in suicidal behavior: Myopic preference or inconsistent valuation?

Authors:  Aliona Tsypes; Katalin Szanto; Jeffrey A Bridge; Vanessa M Brown; John G Keilp; Alexandre Y Dombrovski
Journal:  J Psychopathol Clin Sci       Date:  2021-11-29

3.  Temporal discounting across adulthood: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kendra L Seaman; Sade J Abiodun; Zöe Fenn; Gregory R Samanez-Larkin; Rui Mata
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2022-02

4.  Empirical underidentification in estimating random utility models: The role of choice sets and standardizations.

Authors:  Sebastian Olschewski; Pavel Sirotkin; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 2.410

5.  Attentional priorities drive effects of time pressure on altruistic choice.

Authors:  Yi Yang Teoh; Ziqing Yao; William A Cunningham; Cendri A Hutcherson
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 14.919

6.  Cognitive load decreases cooperation and moral punishment in a Prisoner's Dilemma game with punishment option.

Authors:  Laura Mieth; Axel Buchner; Raoul Bell
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Time pressure changes how people explore and respond to uncertainty.

Authors:  Charley M Wu; Eric Schulz; Timothy J Pleskac; Maarten Speekenbrink
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Does speech rate influence intertemporal decisions? an experimental investigation.

Authors:  Josie I Chen; Tai-Sen He; Hsin-Ya Liao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Cognitive abilities affect decision errors but not risk preferences: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tehilla Mechera-Ostrovsky; Steven Heinke; Sandra Andraszewicz; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-03-30
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.