Do people make decisions under risk based on ignorance? An empirical test of the priority heuristic against cumulative prospect theory

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 107, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 75-95

  Glöckner, Andreas ^a   Betsch, Tilmann ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON COLLECTIVE GOODS   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bounded rationality; Cumulative prospect theory; Decision latency; Decision strategy; Fast and frugal heuristics; Process tracing

Indexed keywords

EID: 49849102986     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.02.003     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Allais, M. (1953/1979). La psychologie de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école Américaine. Econometrica, 21, 503-546. Translated and reprinted in Allais & Hagen, 1979.
2. Bergert F.B., and Nosofsky R.M. A response-time approach to comparing generalized rational and Take-the-Best models of decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33 1 (2007) 107-129
3. Brandstätter E., Gigerenzer G., and Hertwig R. The Priority Heuristic: Making choices without trade-offs. Psychological Review 113 2 (2006) 409-432
4. 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 4 (2003) 611-625
5. Bröder A., and Schiffer S. Bayesian strategy assessment in multi-attribute decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 16 3 (2003) 193-213
6. 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 2 (2003) 277-293
7. Bröder A. Entscheiden mit der "Adaptiven Werkzeugkiste": Ein empirisches Forschungsprogramm [Decision making with the adaptive toolbox: An empirical research program] (2005), Lengerich, Germany, Pabst Science Publications
8. Busemeyer J.R., and Townsend J.T. Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review 100 3 (1993) 432-459
9. Busemeyer J.R., and Johnson J.G. Computational models of decision making. In: Koehler D.J., and Harvey N. (Eds). Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (2004), Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing 133-154
10. Cartwright D. Decision-time in relation to the differentiation of the phenomenal field. Psychological Review 48 5 (1941) 425-442
11. Cartwright D., and Festinger L. A quantitative theory of decision. Psychological Review 50 6 (1943) 595-621
12. Czerlinski J., Gigerenzer G., and Goldstein D.G. How good are simple heuristics?. Simple heuristics that make us smart (1999), Oxford University Press, New York, NY 97-118
13. Edwards W. The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin 51 4 (1954) 380-417
14. Erev, I., Roth, A. E., Slonim, R. L., & Barron, G. (2002). Combining a theoretical prediction with experimental evidence to yield a new prediction: An experimental design with a random sample of tasks. Unpublished manuscript. Columbia University and Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Techion, Haifa, Israel.
15. Epstein S. Cognitive-experiential self-theory. In: Pervin L.A. (Ed). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (1990), Guilford Press, New York, NY 165-192
16. Festinger L. Studies in decision: I. Decision-time, relative frequency of judgment and subjective confidence as related to physical stimulus difference. Journal of Experimental Psychology 32 4 (1943) 291-306
17. Festinger L. Studies in decision. II. An empirical test of a quantitative theory of decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology 32 5 (1943) 411-423
18. Fishburn P.C. Lexicographic orders, utilities, and decision rules: A survey. Management Science 20 (1974) 1442-1472
19. Fishburn P.C., and Kochenberger G.A. Two-piece from von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function. Decision Science 10 (1979) 503-518
20. Gigerenzer G., and Goldstein D.G. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review 103 4 (1996) 650-669
21. Gigerenzer G., and Todd P.M. Simple heuristics that make us smart. Evolution and cognition (1999), Oxford University Press, New York, NY
22. Glimcher P.W., Dorris M.C., and Bayer H.M. Physiological utility theory and the neuroeconomics of choice. Games and Economic Behavior 52 2 (2005) 213-256
23. Glöckner A. Automatische Prozesse bei Entscheidungen [Automatic processes in decision making] (2006), Hamburg, Kovac
24. Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (submitted for publication). Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing.
25. Glöckner A., and Betsch T. Modeling option and strategy choices with connectionist networks: Towards an integrative model of automatic and deliberate decision making. Judgment and Decision Making 3 3 (2008) 215-228
26. Glöckner A. Does intuition beat fast and frugal heuristics? A systematic empirical analysis. In: Plessner H., Betsch C., and Betsch T. (Eds). Intuition in judgment and decision making (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 309-325
27. Glöckner, A. (in press). How evolution outwits bounded rationality: The efficient interaction of automatic and deliberate processes in decision making and implications for institutions. In C. Engel & W. Singer (Eds.), Better Than Conscious? Implications for Performance and Institutional Analysis. Strüngmann Forum Report 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Gold J.I., and Shadlen M.N. The neural basis of decision making. Annual Review of Neuroscience 50 (2007) 535-574
29. Hammond K.R., Hamm R.M., Grassia J., and Pearson T. Direct comparison of the efficacy of intuitive and analytical cognition in expert judgment. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics 17 5 (1987) 753-770
30. Hogarth R.M. Educating intuition (2001), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
31. Hoffman P.J. The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment. Psychological Bulletin 57 2 (1960) 116-131
32. Holyoak K.J., and Simon D. Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 128 1 (1999) 3-31
33. Johnson E.J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck M., and Willemsen M.C. Process models deserve process data: Comment on Brandstatter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review 115 1 (2008) 263-272
34. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (1979) 263-292
35. Kahneman D., and Frederick S. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York, NY 49-81
36. Künzler R., and Bakker T.C.M. Female preferences for single and combined traits in computer animated stickleback males. Behavioral Ecology 12 6 (2001) 681-685
37. Lee M.D., and Cummins T.D.R. Evidence accumulation in decision making: Unifying the "take the best" and the "rational models. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11 2 (2004) 343-352
38. Lohse G.L., and Johnson E.J. A comparison of two process tracing methods for choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68 1 (1996) 28-43
39. 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 1 (2003) 53-65
40. 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 1 (2003) 82-96
41. Newell B.R. Re-visions of rationality?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 1 (2005) 11-15
42. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., and Johnson E.J. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 14 3 (1988) 534-552
43. Petty R.E., and Cacioppo J.T. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19 (1986) 123-205
44. Real L.A. Animal choice behavior and the evolution of cognitive architecture. Science 253 (1991) 886-980
45. Schneider W., and Shiffrin R.M. Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review 84 1 (1977) 1-66
46. Shiffrin R.M., and Schneider W. Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review 84 2 (1977) 127-190
47. Simon D., Krawczyk D.C., and Holyoak K.J. Construction of preferences by constraint satisfaction. Psychological Science 15 5 (2004) 331-336
48. Sloman, S. A. (2002). Two systems of reasoning. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 379-396). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press ISBN 0-521-79260-6 (hardcover); 0-521-79679-2 (paperback) Cambridge University Press Print.
49. Strack F., and Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review 8 3 (2004) 220-247
50. Thagard P., and Millgram E. Inference to the best plan: A coherence theory of decision. In: Ram A., and Leake D.B. (Eds). Goal-driven learning (1995), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 439-454
51. Tversky A. Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review 76 1 (1969) 31-48
52. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992) 297-323
53. Tversky A., and Fox C.R. Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review 102 2 (1995) 269-283
54. von Neumann J., and Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behavior (1947), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
55. Savage L.J. The foundations of statistics. 2nd ed. (1954), Dover, New York
56. Wasserman L. Bayesian model selection and model averaging. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 44 1 (2000) 92-107