Heuristic and Linear Models of Judgment: Matching Rules and Environments

Psychological Review

Volumn 114, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 733-758

  Hogarth, Robin M ^a,b   Karelaia, Natalia ^c  

^a ICREA ^*

^b DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

decision making; heuristics; judgmental biases; lens model; linear models

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LEARNING; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LINEAR MODELS; PROBABILITY LEARNING;

EID: 34648858648     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.733     Document Type: Article

References (99)

1. Anderson N.H. Foundations of information integration theory (1981), Academic Press, New York
2. Armelius B.-A., and Armelius K. The use of redundancy in multiple-cue judgments: Data from a suppressor-variable task. American Journal of Psychology 87 (1974) 385-392
3. Ashton R.H. A descriptive study of information evaluation. Journal of Accounting Research 19 (1981) 42-61
4. Baucells, M., Carrasco, J. A., & Hogarth, R. M. (in press). Cumulative dominance and heuristic performance in multi-attribute choice. Operations Research
5. Brehmer B. The psychology of linear judgement models. Acta Psychologica 87 (1994) 137-154
6. Brehmer B., and Hagafors R. Use of experts in complex decision making: A paradigm for the study of staff work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 38 (1986) 181-195
7. Brehmer B., and Joyce C.R.B. Human judgment: The SJT view (1988), North-Holland, Amsterdam
8. Brehmer B., and Kuylenstierna J. Content and consistency in probabilistic inference tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 26 (1980) 54-64
9. Bröder A. Assessing the empirical validity of the "take-the-best" heuristic as a model of human probabilistic inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26 (2000) 1332-1346
10. Bröder A. Decision making with the "adaptive toolbox": Influence of environmental structure, intelligence, and working memory load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29 (2003) 611-625
11. Bröder A., and Schiffer S. Take the best versus simultaneous feature matching: Probabilistic inferences from memory and effects of representation format. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 132 (2003) 277-293
12. Bröder A., and Schiffer S. Adaptive flexibility and maladaptive routines in selecting fast and frugal decision strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32 (2006) 904-918
13. Brunswik E. The conceptual framework of psychology (1952), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
14. Camerer C.F. General conditions for the success of bootstrapping models. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 27 (1981) 411-422
15. Chasseigne G., Grau S., Mullet E., and Cama V. How well do elderly people cope with uncertainty in a learning task?. Acta Psychologica 103 (1999) 229-238
16. Chasseigne G., Mullet E., and Stewart T.R. Aging and multiple cue probability learning: The case of inverse relationships. Acta Psychologica 97 (1997) 235-252
17. Cooksey R.W. Judgment analysis: Theory, methods, and applications (1996), Academic Press, New York
18. Dawes R.M. The robust beauty of improper linear models. American Psychologist 34 (1979) 571-582
19. Dawes R.M., and Corrigan B. Linear models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin 81 (1974) 95-106
20. Dawes R.M., Faust D., and Meehl P.E. Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science 243 (1989, March 31) 1668-1674
21. Deane D.H., Hammond K.R., and Summers D.A. Acquisition and application of knowledge in complex inference tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology 92 (1972) 20-26
22. Dhami M.K., Hertwig R., and Hoffrage U. The role of representative design in an ecological approach to cognition. Psychological Bulletin 130 (2004) 959-988
23. Doherty M.E., Tweney R.D., O'Connor Jr. R.M., and Walker B. The role of data and feedback error in inference and prediction: Final report for ARI contract MDA903-85-K-0193 (1988), Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH
24. Einhorn H.J. Expert measurement and mechanical combination. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 7 (1972) 86-106
25. Einhorn H.J. Accepting error to make less error. Journal of Personality Assessment 50 (1986) 387-395
26. Einhorn H.J., and Hogarth R.M. Unit weighting schemes for decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 13 (1975) 171-192
27. Einhorn H.J., Kleinmuntz D.N., and Kleinmuntz B. Linear regression and process tracing models of judgment. Psychological Review 86 (1979) 465-485
28. Fasolo B., McClelland G.H., and Todd P.M. Escaping the tyranny of choice: When fewer attributes make choice easier. Marketing Theory 7 (2007) 13-26
29. Gigerenzer G. On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky (1996). Psychological Review 103 (1996) 592-596
30. Gigerenzer G., and Goldstein D.G. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review 103 (1996) 650-669
31. Gigerenzer G., Todd P.M., and the ABC Research Group. Simple heuristics that make us smart (1999), Oxford University Press, New York
32. Goldberg L.R. Man versus model of man: A rationale, plus some evidence, for a method of improving on clinical judgment. Psychological Bulletin 73 (1970) 422-432
33. Goldstein D.G., and Gigerenzer G. Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic. Psychological Review 109 (2002) 75-90
34. Hammond K.R. Probabilistic functioning and the clinical method. Psychological Review 62 (1955) 255-262
35. Hammond K.R. Human judgment and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice (1996), Oxford University Press, New York
36. Hammond K.R., Hursch C.J., and Todd F.J. Analyzing the components of clinical inference. Psychological Review 71 (1964) 438-456
37. Hammond K.R., and Stewart T.R. The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (2001), Oxford University Press, New York
38. Hammond K.R., and Summers D.A. Cognitive dependence on linear and nonlinear cues. Psychological Review 72 (1965) 215-224
39. Hammond K.R., Summers D.A., and Deane D.H. Negative effects of outcome-feedback in multiple-cue probability learning. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 9 (1973) 30-34
40. Hammond K.R., Wilkins M.M., and Todd F.J. A research paradigm for the study of interpersonal learning. Psychological Bulletin 65 (1966) 221-232
41. Hastie R., and Kameda T. The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions. Psychological Review 112 (2005) 494-508
42. Hoffman P.J. The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment. Psychological Bulletin 57 (1960) 116-131
43. Hoffman P.J., Earle T.C., and Slovic P. Multidimensional functional learning (MFL) and some new conceptions of feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 27 (1981) 75-102
44. Hogarth R.M. Beyond discrete biases: Functional and dysfunctional aspects of judgmental heuristics. Psychological Bulletin 90 (1981) 197-217
45. Hogarth R.M. Judgement and choice: The psychology of decision. 2nd ed. (1987), Wiley, Chichester, England
46. Hogarth R.M. Educating intuition (2001), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
47. Hogarth R.M., Gibbs B.J., McKenzie C.R.M., and Marquis M.A. Learning from feedback: Exactingness and incentives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 17 (1991) 734-752
48. Hogarth R.M., and Karelaia N. Ignoring information in binary choice with continuous variables: When is less "more"?. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 49 (2005) 115-124
49. Hogarth R.M., and Karelaia N. Simple models for multi-attribute choice with many alternatives: When it does and does not pay to face trade-offs with binary attributes. Management Science 5 (2005) 1860-1872
50. Hogarth R.M., and Karelaia N. Regions of rationality: Maps for bounded agents. Decision Analysis 3 (2006) 124-144
51. Hogarth R.M., and Karelaia N. "Take-the-best" and other simple strategies: Why and when they work "well" in binary choice. Theory and Decision 61 (2006) 205-249
52. Holzworth R.J., and Doherty M.E. Feedback effects in a metric multiple-cue probability learning task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 8 (1976) 1-3
53. Hursch C.J., Hammond K.R., and Hursch J.L. Some methodological considerations in multiple-probability studies. Psychological Review 71 (1964) 42-60
54. Jarnecke R.W., and Rudestam K.E. Effects of amounts and units of information on the judgmental process. Perceptual and Motor Skills 13 (1976) 823-829
55. Juslin P., and Persson M. PROBabilities from EXemplars (PROBEX): A "lazy" algorithm for probabilistic inference from generic knowledge. Cognitive Science 26 (2002) 563-607
56. Kahneman D., Slovic P., and Tversky A. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (1982), Cambridge University Press, New York
57. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review 103 (1996) 582-591
58. Karelaia N. Thirst for confirmation in multi-attribute choice: Does search for consistency impair decision performance?. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 100 (2006) 128-143
59. Karelaia N., and Hogarth R.M. Determinants of linear judgment: A meta-analysis of lens model studies (DEE Working Paper No. 1007) (2007), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
60. Katsikopoulos K.V., and Martignon L. Naïve heuristics for paired comparisons: Some results on their relative accuracy. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 50 (2006) 488-494
61. Keeney R., and Raiffa H. Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs (1976), Wiley, New York
62. Kessler L., and Ashton R.H. Feedback and prediction achievement in financial analysis. Journal of Accounting Research 19 (1981) 146-162
63. Klayman J., and Ha Y.-W. Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review 94 (1987) 211-228
64. Kleinmuntz B. Why we still use our heads instead of formulas: Toward an integrative approach. Psychological Bulletin 107 (1990) 296-310
65. Lafon P., Chasseigne G., and Mullet E. Functional learning among children, adolescents, and young adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 88 (2004) 334-347
66. Lee J.-W., and Yates J.F. How quantity judgment changes as the number of cues increases: An analytical framework and review. Psychological Bulletin 112 (1992) 363-377
67. Lindell M.K. Cognitive and outcome feedback in multiple-cue probability learning tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 2 (1976) 739-745
68. Louvière J.J. Analyzing decision making: Metric conjoint analysis (1988), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
69. Luce M.F., Payne J.W., and Bettman J.R. Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. Journal of Marketing Research 36 (1999) 143-159
70. Martignon L., and Hoffrage U. Why does one-reason decision making work? A case study in ecological rationality. In: Gigerenzer G., Todd P.M., and the ABC Research Group (Eds). Simple heuristics that make us smart (1999), Oxford University Press, New York 119-140
71. Martignon L., and Hoffrage U. Fast, frugal, and fit: Simple heuristics for paired comparison. Theory and Decision 52 (2002) 29-71
72. McKenzie C.R.M. The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology 26 (1994) 209-239
73. Meehl P.E. Clinical versus statistical prediction (1954), University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis
74. Montgomery H. Decision rules and the search for dominance structure: Towards a process model of decision making. In: Humphreys P., Svenson O., and Vari A. (Eds). Analyzing and aiding decision processes (1983), North-Holland, Amsterdam 343-369
75. Muchinsky P.M., and Dudycha A.L. Human inference behavior in abstract and meaningful environments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 13 (1975) 377-391
76. Newell B.R., and Shanks D.R. Take the best or look at the rest? Factors influencing "one-reason" decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29 (2003) 53-65
77. Newell B.R., Weston N.J., and Shanks D.R. Empirical tests of a fast-and-frugal heuristic: Not everyone "takes-the-best.". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 91 (2003) 82-96
78. O'Connor M., Remus W., and Lim K. Improving judgmental forecasts with judgmental bootstrapping and task feedback support. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 18 (2005) 246-260
79. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., and Johnson E.J. The adaptive decision maker (1993), Cambridge University Press, New York
80. Rieskamp J., and Hoffrage U. When do people use simple heuristics, and how can we tell?. In: Gigerenzer G., Todd P.M., and the ABC Research Group (Eds). Simple heuristics that make us smart (1999), Oxford University Press, New York 141-167
81. Rieskamp J., and Otto P.E. SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135 (2006) 207-236
82. Rothstein H.G. The effects of time pressure on judgment in multiple cue probability learning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 37 (1986) 83-92
83. Shanteau J., Friel B.M., Thomas R.P., and Raacke L. Development of expertise in a dynamic decision-making environment. In: Betsch T., and Haberstroh S. (Eds). The routines of decision making (2005), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 251-270
84. Shanteau J., and Thomas R.P. Fast and frugal heuristics: What about unfriendly environments?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (2000) 762-763
85. Simon H.A. A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics 69 (1955) 99-118
86. Simon H.A. Rational choice and the structure of environments. Psychological Review 63 (1956) 129-138
87. Slovic P., Finucane M., Peters E., and MacGregor D.G. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York 397-420
88. Steinmann D.O. Transfer of lens model learning. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 12 (1974) 1-16
89. Steinmann D.O., and Doherty M.E. A lens model analysis of a bookbag and poker chip experiment: A methodological note. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 8 (1972) 450-455
90. Stewart T.R., Roebber P.J., and Bosart L.F. The importance of the task in analyzing expert judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 69 (1997) 205-219
91. Summers S.A., Summers R.C., and Karkau V.T. Judgments based on different functional relationships between interacting cues and a criterion. American Journal of Psychology 82 (1969) 203-211
92. Thorngate W. Efficient decision heuristics. Behavioral Science 25 (1980) 219-225
93. Tucker L.R. A suggested alternative formulation in the developments by Hursch, Hammond, and Hursch and by Hammond, Hursch, and Todd. Psychological Review 71 (1964) 528-530
94. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology 4 (1973) 207-232
95. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185 (1974, September 27) 1124-1131
96. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review 90 (1983) 293-315
97. Wainer H. Estimating coefficients in linear models: It don't make no nevermind. Psychological Bulletin 83 (1976) 213-217
98. York K.M., Doherty M.E., and Kamouri J. The influence of cue unreliability in a multiple cue probability learning task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 39 (1987) 303-317
99. Youmans R.J., and Stone E.R. To thy own self be true: Finding the utility of cognitive information feedback. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 18 (2005) 319-341