Decision making under conflict: Decision time as a measure of conflict strength

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 167-176

  Diederich, Adele ^a  

^a JACOBS UNIVERSITY BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFLICT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; FEMALE; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MOTIVATION; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MOTIVATION; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; RISK-TAKING;

EID: 0042278540     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196481     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. BERLYNE, D. E. (1957). Conflict and choice time. British Journal of Psychology, 48, 106-118.
2. BÖCKENHOLT, U., ALBERT, D., ASCHENBRENNER, M., & SCHMALHOFER, F. (1991). The effects of attractiveness, dominance, and attribute differences on information acquisition in multiattribute binary choice. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 49, 258-281.
3. 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.
4. BUSEMEYER, J. R., & DIEDERICH, A. (2002). Survey of decision field theory. Mathematical Social Sciences, 43, 345-370.
5. BUSEMEYER, J. R., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1992). Fundamental derivations from decision field theory. Mathematical Social Sciences, 23, 255-282.
6. 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.
7. COOMBS, C. H., & AVRUNIN, G. S. (1988). The structure of conflict. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. DASHIELL, J. F. (1937). Affective value-distances as a determinant of esthetic judgment-times. American Journal of Psychology, 50, 57-67.
9. DIEDERICH, A. (1995). A dynamic model for multi-attributive decision problems. In J. P. Caverni, M. Bar-Hillel, F. H. Barron, & H. Jungermann (Eds.), Contributions to decision making (Vol. I, pp. 175-191). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
10. DIEDERICH, A. (1996). Multi-attribute dynamic decision model: A cognitive dynamic approach for multiattribute binary choice tasks. Unpublished Habilitationsschrift, Universität Oldenburg.
11. DIEDERICH, A. (1997). Dynamic stochastic models for decision making with time constraints. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41, 260-274.
12. DIEDERICH, A., & BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1999). Conflict and the stochastic dominance principle of decision making. Psychological Science, 10, 353-359.
13. HANSEN, F. (1972). Consumer choice behavior: A cognitive theory. New York: Free Press.
14. HOGARTH, R. M. (1975). Decision time as a function of task complexity. In D. Wendt & C. Vlek (Eds.), Utility, probability, and human decision making (pp. 321-338). Dordrecht: Reidel.
15. HOUSTON, D. A., SHERMAN, S. J., & BAKER, S. M. (1991). Feature matching, unique features, and the dynamics of the choice process: Predecision conflict and postdecision satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 411-430.
16. HULL, C. L. (1932). The goal gradient hypothesis and maze learning. Psychological Review, 39, 25-43.
17. JANIS, I. L., & MANN, L. (1977). A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
18. LEWIN, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Selected theoretical papers, edited by D. Cartwright. New York: Harper & Brothers.
19. LEWIN, K. (1964). Die psychologische Situation bei Lohn und Strafe [The psychological situation of reward and punishment]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. (Original work published 1931)
20. LUCE, M. F., BETTMAN, J. R., & PAYNE, J. W. (1997). Choice processing in emotionally difficult decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 384-405.
21. MELLERS, B., SCHWARTZ, A., HO, K., & RITOV, I. (1997). Decision affect theory: How we feel about risky options. Psychological Science, 8, 423-429.
22. MILLER, N. E. (1944). Experimental studies of conflict. In J. M. Hunt (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disorders (Vol. 1, pp. 431-465). New York: Ronald Press.
23. PAYNE, J. W., BETTMAN, J. R., & SCHKADE, D. A. (1999). Measuring constructed preferences: Towards a building code. Journal of Risk & Uncertainty, 19, 243-270.
24. ROE, R. M., BUSEMEYER, J. R., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (2001). Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionist model of decision making. Psychological Review, 108, 370-392.
25. SCHREIBER, C. A., & KAHNEMAN, D. (2000). Determinants of the remembered utility of aversive sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 27-42.
26. TOWNSEND, J. T., & BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1989). Approach-avoidance: Return to dynamic decision behavior. In C. Izawa (Ed.), Current issues in cognitive processes: The Tulane Flowerree Symposium on Cognition (pp. 107-133). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. TVERSKY, A., & SHAFIR, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3, 358-361.