Contingent approaches to making likelihood judgments about polychotomous cases: The influence of task factors

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 281-303

  Windschitl, Paul D ^a,b   Krizan, Zlatan ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b University of Iowa   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative outcomes effect; Contingent processes; Heuristics; Likelihood judgment; Probability

Indexed keywords

EID: 27544493784     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.505     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Ben Zur, H., & Breznitz, S. J. (1981). The effects of time pressure on risky choice behavior. Acta Psychologies 47, 89-104.
2. Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1981). Behavioral decision theory: processes of judgment and choice. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 53-88.
3. Gigerenzer, G. (1991). How to make cognitive illusions disappear: beyond "Heuristics and biases." European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 83-115.
4. Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: a reply to Kahneman and Tversky (1996). Psychological Review, 103, 592-596.
5. Ginossar, Z., & Trope, Y. (1987). Problem solving in judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 464-474.
6. Gonzalez, M., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (1993). Determinants of numerical versus verbal probabilities. Acta Psychologica, 83, 33-51.
7. Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1989). The effect of task demands and graphical format on information processing strategies. Management Science, 35, 285-303.
8. Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1990). Graphic displays in decision making: the visual salience effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 247-262.
9. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Dickson, G. W. (1988). Graphics and managerial decision making: research based guidelines. Communications of the ACM, 31, 764-774.
10. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720.
11. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1996). On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review, 103, 582-591.
12. Kleinmuntz, D. N., & Schkade, D. A. (1993). Information displays and decision processes. Psychological Science, 4, 221-227.
13. Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999). The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 972-987.
14. Payne, J. B., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 534-552.
15. Payne, J. W. (1982). Contingent decision behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 382-402.
16. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral decision research: a constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87-131.
17. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
18. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (1996). When time is money: decision behavior under opportunity-cost time pressure. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 131-152.
19. Rottenstreich, Y., & Tversky, A. (1997). Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: advances in support theory. Psychological Review, 104, 406-415.
20. Russo, J. E., & Dosher, B. A. (1983). Strategies for multiattribute binary choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 676-696.
21. Schkade, D. A., & Kleinmuntz, D. N. (1994). Information displays and choice processes: differential effects of organization, form, and sequence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 319-337.
22. Shah, P., Freedman, E., & Vekiri, I. (In press). The comprehension of quantitative information in graphical displays. In P. Shah, & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Shah, P., Mayer, R. E., & Hegarty, M. (1999). Graphs as aids to knowledge construction: signaling techniques for guiding the process of graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 690-702.
24. Simkin, D., & Hastie, R. (1987). An information-processing analysis of graph perception. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 454-465.
25. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
26. Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (2002). Compatibility effects in judgment and choice. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 217-229). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
27. Stone, E. R., Sieck, W. R., Bull, B. E., Yates, J. F., Parks, S. C., & Rush, C. J. (2003). Foreground: background salience: explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 19-36.
28. Svenson, O. (1979). Process descriptions of decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 86-112.
29. Teigen, K. H. (1988). When are low-probability events judged to be 'probable'? Effects of outcome-set characteristics on verbal probability estimates. Acta Psychologica, 67, 157-174.
30. Teigen, K. H. (2001). When equal chances = good chances: verbal probabilities and the equiprobability effect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 77-108.
31. Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: a theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79, 281-299.
32. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgments of and by representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 84-98). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33. Tversky, A. & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory, a nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547-567.
34. Windschitl, P. D., & Chambers, J. C. (2004). The dud-alternative effect in likelihood judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 198-215.
35. Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1996). Measuring psychological uncertainty: verbal versus numeric methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 343-364.
36. Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1998). The alternative-outcomes effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1411-1423.
37. Windschitl, P. D., & Young, M. E. (2001). The influence of alternative outcomes on gut-level perceptions of certainty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 109-134.
38. Windschitl, P. D., Young, M. E., & Jenson, M. E. (2002). Likelihood judgment based on previously observed outcomes: the alternative outcomes effect in a learning paradigm. Memory and Cognition, 30, 469-477.
39. Wright, P. L. (1974). The harassed decision maker: time pressures, distraction, and the use of evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 555-561.