Decision making under time pressure: An independent test of sequential sampling models

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 713-725

  Dror, Itiel E ^a   Busemeyer, Jerome R ^b   Basola, Beth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COGNITION; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; PERCEPTION; PROBABILITY; RISK; SAMPLING;

EID: 0032863216     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03211564     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. ALBERT, D., ASCHENBRENNER, K. M., & SCHMALHOFER, F. (1989). Cognitive choice processes and the attitude-behavior relation. In A. Upmeyer (Ed.), Attitudes and behavioral decisions (pp. 61-99). New York: Springer-Verlag.
2. ANDERSON, G., & BROWN, R. I. (1984) Real and laboratory gambling, sensation-seeking and arousal. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 401-410.
3. ASCHENBRENNER, K. M., ALBERT, D., & SCHMALHOFER, F. (1986). Stochastic choice heuristics. Acta Psychologica, 56, 153-166.
4. BEN ZUR, H., & BREZNITZ, S. J. (1981). The effect of time pressure on risky choice behavior. Acta Psychologica, 47, 89-104.
5. BOND, N. (1974). Basic strategy and expectation in casino blackjack. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 12, 413-428.
6. BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1982). Choice behavior in a sequential decision making task. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 29, 175-207.
7. BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1985). Decision making under uncertainty: A comparison of simple scalability, fixed sample, and sequential sampling models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 11, 538-564.
8. BUSEMEYER, J. R., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1992). Fundamental derivations for decision field theory. Mathematical Social Sciences, 23, 255-282.
9. BUSEMEYER, J. R., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
10. DIEDERICH, A. (1995). A dynamic model for multi-attribute decision problems. In J. Cavemi, M. Bar-Hillel, F. Hutton-Barron, & H. Jungermann (Eds.), Contributions to decision making (pp. 75-191). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
11. DROR, I. E., & GALLOGLY, D. P. (1999). Computational analyses in cognitive neuroscience: In defense of biological implausibility. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 173-182.
12. DROR, I. E., KATONA, M., & MUNGUR, K. (1998). Aging and decision making: To take a risk or not? Gerontology, 44, 67-71.
13. DROR, I. E., RAFAELY, V., & BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1999). The dynamics of decision making as a function of recent outcomes and possible consequences. Paper presented at the Sixth European Congress of Psychology, Rome.
14. GOLDSTEIN, W. M., & WEBER, E. U. (1996). Content and discontent: Indications and implications of domain specificity in preferential decision making. In J. R. Busemeyer, D. L. Medin, & R. Hastie (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 32. Decision makingfrom a cognitive perspective (pp. 83-126). New York: Academic Press.
15. JOHNSON, E. J., PAYNE, J. W., & BETTMAN, J. R. (1995). Adapting to time constraints. In O. Svenson & J. Maule (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 167-178). New York: Plenum.
16. KEREN, G. B., & WAGENAAR, W. A. (1985). On the psychology of playing blackjack: Normative and descriptive considerations with implications for decision theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 113-158.
17. KORNBROT, D. E. (1989). Random walk models of binary choice: The effect of deadlines in the presence of asymmetric payoffs. Acta Psychologica, 72, 103.
18. LINK, S. W. (1992). The wave theory of difference similarity. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. NOSOFSKY, R. M., & PALMERI, T. J. (1997). An exemplar based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review, 104, 266-300.
20. PAYNE, J. W., BETTMAN, J. R., & LUCE, M. F. (1996). When time is money: Decision behavior under opportunity-cost time pressure. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 66, 131-152.
21. PETRUSIC, W. M., & JAMIESON, D. G. (1978). Relation between probability of preferential choice and time to choose changes with practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 4, 471-482.
22. PHILLIPS, J. G., & AMRHEIN, P. C. (1989). Factors influencing wagers in simulated blackjack. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 5, 99-111.
23. RAFAELY, V., DROR, I. E., & BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1998). The susceptibility of young and old adults to positive and negative outcomes of recent decisions. Abstracts of the Psychonomic Society, 3, 41.
24. RATCLIFF, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108.
25. RATCLIFF, R., VAN ZANDT, T., & MCKOON, G. (in press). Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychological Review.
26. SMITH, P. L. (1995). Psychophysically principled models of visual simple reaction time. Psychological Review, 102, 567-593.
27. SVENSON, O., & MAULE, J. (1995). Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making. New York: Plenum.
28. TOWNSEND, J. T., & BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1996). Dynamic representation of decision-making. In R. F. Port & T. van Gelder (Eds.), Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. WALLSTEN, T. S. (1995). Time pressure and payoff effects on multidimensional probabilistic inference. In O. Svenson & J. Maule (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 167-178). New York: Plenum.