The smart potential behind probability matching

Cognition

Volumn 109, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 416-422

  Gaissmaier, Wolfgang ^a,b   Schooler, Lael J ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Pattern search; Probability matching; Working memory capacity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; VERBAL MEMORY; WORKING MEMORY;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; MENTAL PROCESSES; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PROBABILITY LEARNING; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 56349124810     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.09.007     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Ayton P., and Fischer I. The hot-hand fallacy and the gambler's fallacy: Two faces of subjective randomness?. Memory and Cognition 32 (2004) 1369-1378
2. Ayton P., Hunt A.J., and Wright G. Psychological conceptions of randomness. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (1989) 221-238
3. Bar-Hillel M., and Wagenaar W.A. The perception of randomness. Advances in Applied Mathematics 12 (1991) 428-454
4. Cokely E.T., Kelley C.M., and Gilchrist A.L. Sources of individual differences in working memory: Contributions of strategy to capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 13 (2006) 991-997
5. Conway A.R.A., Kane M.J., Bunting M.F., Hambrick D.Z., Wilhelm O., and Engle R.W. Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user's guide. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 12 (2005) 769-786
6. DeCaro M.S., Thomas R.D., and Beilock S.L. Individual differences in category learning: Sometimes less working memory capacity is better than more. Cognition 107 (2008) 284-294
7. Falk R., and Konold C. Making sense of randomness: Implicit encoding as a basis for judgment. Psychological Review 104 (1997) 301-318
8. Gaissmaier W., Schooler L.J., and Mata R. An ecological perspective to cognitive limits: Modeling environment-mind interactions with ACT-R. Judgment and Decision Making 3 (2008) 278-291
9. Gaissmaier W., Schooler L.J., and Rieskamp J. Simple predictions fueled by capacity limitations: When are they successful?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 32 (2006) 966-982
10. Gilovich T., Vallone R., and Tversky A. The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences. Cognitive Psychology 17 (1985) 295-314
11. Goodnow J.J. Determinants of choice-distribution in two-choice situations. American Journal of Psychology 68 (1955) 106-116
12. Harris T. The silence of the lambs (1991), St. Martin's Press, New York (first edition in 1988)
13. Hyman R., and Jenkin N.S. Involvement and set as determinants of behavioral stereotypy. Psychological Reports 2 (1956) 131-146
14. Irwin J.R., and McClelland G.H. Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous predictor variables. Journal of Marketing Research 40 (2003) 366-371
15. Kareev Y. Through a narrow window: Working memory capacity and the detection of covariation. Cognition 56 (1995) 263-269
16. Kareev Y., Lieberman I., and Lev M. Through a narrow window: Sample size and the perception of correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 126 (1997) 278-287
17. Lopes L.L. Doing the impossible: A note on induction and the experience of randomness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 8 (1982) 626-636
18. Newell B.R., and Rakow T. The role of experience in decisions from description. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 14 (2007) 1133-1139
19. Nowak M.A., and Sigmund K. A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in Prisoner's Dilemma. Nature 364 (1993) 56-58
20. Pinker S. How the mind works (1997), Norton, New York
21. Rakow T., Demes K.A., and Newell B.R. Biased samples not mode of presentation: Re-examining the apparent underweighting of rare events in experience-based choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 106 (2008) 168-179
22. Rieskamp J. Positive and negative recency effects in retirement savings decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 121 (2006) 233-250
23. Todd P.M., and Gigerenzer G. Environments that make us smart: Ecological rationality. Current Directions in Psychological Science 16 (2007) 167-171
24. Unsworth N., Heitz R.P., Schrock J.C., and Engle R.W. An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods 37 (2005) 498-505
25. Unturbe J., and Corominas J. Probability matching involves rule-generating ability: A neuropsychological mechanism dealing with probabilities. Neuropsychology 21 (2007) 621-630
26. Vulkan N. An economist's perspective on probability matching. Journal of Economic Surveys 14 (2000) 101-118
27. West R.F., and Stanovich K.E. Is probability matching smart? Associations between probabilistic choices and cognitive ability. Memory and Cognition 31 (2003) 243-251
28. Wolford G., Miller M.B., and Gazzaniga M. The left hemisphere's role in hypothesis formation. The Journal of Neuroscience 20 RC64 (2000) 1-4
29. Wolford G., Newman S., Miller M.B., and Wig G. Searching for patterns in random sequences. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 58 (2004) 221-228
30. Yellott Jr. J.I. Probability learning with noncontingent success. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 6 (1969) 541-575