Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 20-33

  Cokely, Edward T ^b   Kelley, Colleen M ^a  

^a Department of Psychology ^*

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cognitive control; Dual process theory; Expected value; Information search; Intelligence; Numeracy; Priority heuristic; Protocol analysis; Rationality; Risky choice; Working memory

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350151112     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. N. (2007). Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology-General, 136, 569-576.
2. Bailey, H., Dunlosky, J., & Kane, M. J. (2008) Why does working memory span predict complex cognition? Testing the strategy affordance hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1383-1390.
3. Baron, J. (1978). Intelligence and general strategies. In G. Underwood (Eds.). Strategies of information processing, (pp. 403-450). Academic Press.
4. Baron, J. (1985) Rationality and intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5. Baron, J. (1990). Reflectiveness and rational thinking: Response to Duemler and Mayer (1988). Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 391-392.
6. Botella, J., Pena, D., Contreras, M. J., Shih, P. C., & Santacreu, J. (2009). Performance as a function of ability, resources invested, and strategy used. Journal of General Psychology, 136, 41-69.
7. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2006). The priority heuristic: Making choices without tradeoffs. Psychological Review, 133, 409-432.
8. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2008). Risky choice with heuristics: Reply to Birnbaum (2008), Johnson, Schulte-Mecklenbeck, and Willemsen (2008), and Rieger and Wang (2008). Psychological Review, 115, 281-289.
9. Bröder, A. (2003). Decision making with the "adaptive toolbox": Influence of environmental structure, intelligence, and working memory load. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 29, 611-625.
10. Birnbaum, M. H. (2008). New tests of cumulative prospect theory and the priority heuristic: Probabilityoutcome tradeoff with branch splitting. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 304-316.
11. Cokely, E. T., & Feltz, A. (2009). Individual differences, judgment biases, and theory-of-mind: Deconstructing the intentional action side effect asymmetry. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 18-24.
12. Cokely, E. T., Kelley, C. M., & Gilchrist, A. L. (2006). Sources of individual differences in working memory: Contributions of strategy to capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 991-997.
13. De Neys, W. (2006). Dual processing in reasoning - Two systems but one reasoner. Psychological Science, 17, 428-433.
14. De Neys, W., & Glumicic, T. (2008). Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking. Cognition, 106, 1248-1299.
15. Dougherty, M. R. P., & Hunter, J. E. (2003). Hypothesis generation, probability judgment, and individual differences in working memory capacity. Acta Psychologica, 113, 263-282.
16. Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working-memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211- 245.
17. Ericsson, K. A., Prietula, M. J., & Cokely, E. T. (2007). The making of an expert. Harvard Business Review, 85, 114-121.
18. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
19. Evans, J. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Reviewof Psychology, 59, 255-278.
20. Fasolo, B., Misuraca, R., & McClelland, G. H. (2003). Individual differences in adaptive choice strategies. Research in Economics, 57, 219-233.
21. Feltz, A., & Cokely, E. T. (2008). Do judgments about freedom and responsibility depend on who you are? Personality differences in intuitions about compatibilism and incompatibilism. Consciousness and Cognition. doi: 10.1016/j. concog.2008.08.001.
22. Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 24-42.
23. Galesic, M., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Using Icon Arrays to communicate medical risks: Overcoming low numeracy. Health Psychology. doi: 10.1037/a0014474.
24. Gaissmaier, W., & Schooler, L. J. (2008). The smart potential behind probability matching. Cognition, 109, 416-422.
25. Gaissmaier, W., Schooler, L. J., & Rieskamp, J. (2006). Simple predictions fueled by capacity limitations: When are they successful? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 966-982.
26. Gaissmaier, W., Schooler, L. J., & Mata, R. (2008). An ecological perspective to cognitive limits: Modeling environment-mind interactions with ACT-R. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 278-291.
27. Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. and the ABC Research Group (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103, 650-669.
29. Guida, A., Tardieu, H., & Nicolas, S. (2008). The personalisation method applied to a working memory task: Evidence of long-term working memory effects. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, doi: 10.1080/ 09541440802236369.
30. Hertzog, C., & Robinson, A. E. (2005). Metacognition and intelligence. In O. Wilhelm & R. W. Engle (Eds.), Understanding and measuring intelligence, pp. 101- 123. London: Sage.
31. Hilbig, B. E. (2008). One-reason decision making in risky choice? A closer look at the priority heuristic. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 457-462.
32. Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 133, 23-30.
33. Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., & McElree, B. D. (1999). The role of cognitive control: Early selection versus late correction. In S. Chaiken&Y. Trope, (Eds.), Dual- Process Theories in Social Psychology, pp. 383-402. New York, US: The Gilford Press.
34. Jacoby, L. L., Shimizu, Y., Daniels, K. A., & Rhodes, M. G. (2005). Modes of cognitive control in recognition and source memory: Depth of retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 852-857.
35. Johnson, E. J., Haubl, G., & Keinan, A. (2007). Aspects of endowment: A query theory of value construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 33, 461-474.
36. Johnson, E. J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Willernsen, M. C. (2008). Process models deserve process data: Comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review, 115, 263-272.
37. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice - Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 9, 697-720.
38. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
39. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2007). Frames and brains: Elicitation and control of response tendencies. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 45-46.
40. Karlsson, L., Juslin, P., & Olsson, H. (2008). Exemplarbased inference in multi-attribute decision making: Contingent, not automatic, strategy shifts? Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 244-260.
41. Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21, 37- 44.
42. Mata, R., Schooler, L. J., & Rieskamp, J. (2007). The aging decision maker: Cognitive aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychology and Aging, 22, 796-810.
43. Mann, L., & Ball, C. (1994). The relationship between search strategy and risky choice. Australian Journal of Psychology, 46, 131-136.
44. McNamara, D. S., & Scott, J. L. (2001). Working memory capacity and strategy use. Memory & Cognition, 29, 10-17.
45. Morsanyi, K, & Handley, S. J. (2008). How smart do you need to be to get it wrong? The role of cognitive capacity in the development of heuristic-based judgment. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 99, 18-36.
46. Payne, J.W. (1976). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision-making - information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366-387.
47. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., Coupey, E., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). A constructive process view of decisionmaking - multiple strategies in judgment and choice. Acta Psychologica, 80, 107-141.
48. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., Johnson, E. J., 1993. The adaptive decision maker. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49. Payne, J. W., & Braunstein, M. L. (1978). Risky choice - examination of information acquisition behavior, Memory & Cognition, 6, 554-561.
50. Payne, J. W., Samper, A., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (2008). Boundary Conditions on Unconscious Thought in Complex Decision Making. Psychological Science, 19, 1118-1123.
51. Peters, E. & Levin, I. P. (2008). Dissecting the riskychoice framing effect: Numeracy as an individualdifference factor in weighting risky and riskless options. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 435-448.
52. Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17, 407-413.
53. Reisen, N., Hoffrage, U., & Mast, F. W. (2008). Identifying decision strategies in a consumer choice situation. Judgment and decision making, 3, 641-658.
54. Rettinger, D. A., & Hastie, R. (2001). Content effects on decision making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 85, 336-359.
55. Rettinger, D. A., & Hastie, R. (2003). Comprehension and decision making. In S. L. Schneider & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research, pp. 165-201. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
56. Rieskamp, J., & Hoffrage, U. (2008). Inferences under time pressure: How opportunity costs affect strategy selection. Acta Psychologica, 127, 258-276.
57. Rieskamp, J., & Otto, P. E. (2006). SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 207-236.
58. Schooler, L. J., & Hertwig, R. (2005). How forgetting aids heuristic inference. Psychological Review, 112, 610-628.
59. Selart, M., Kuvaas, B., Boe, O., & Takemura, K. (2006). The influence of decision heuristics and overconfidence on multiattribute choice: A process-tracing study. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 437-453.
60. Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1-19.
61. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 199, 3-22.
62. Shanteau, J. (1992). How much information does an expert use? Is it relevant? Acta Psychologica, 81, 75-86.
63. Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Component processes in analogical reasoning.Psychological Review, 84, 353-378.
64. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 161-188.
65. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-665.
66. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 672- 695.
67. Thomas, R. P., Dougherty, M. R. P., Sprenger, A. M., & Harbison, J. I. (2008). Diagnostic hypothesis generation and human judgment. Psychological Review, 115, 155-185.
68. Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 127-154.
69. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1130.
70. Vigneau, F., Caissie, A. F., & Bors, D. A. (2005). Eyemovement analysis demonstrates strategic influence on intelligence. Intelligence, 34, 261-272.
71. Weber, E. U., Johnson, E. J., Milch, K. F., Chang, H., Brodscholl, J. C., & Goldstein, D. G. (2007). Asymmetric discounting in intertemporal choice: A querytheory account. Psychological Science, 18, 516-523.