Coherence shifts in probabilistic inference tasks

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 439-462

  Glöckner, Andreas ^a   Betsch, Tilmann ^b   Schindler, Nicola ^b  

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

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Adaptive decision making; Bounded rationality; Connectionism; Fast and frugal heuristics; Judgment; MOTS CL S (2340) cognitive processes; Parallel constraint satisfaction

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649498401     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: 10990771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.668     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3, 439-449.
2. Bergert, F. B., & Nosofsky, R. M. (2007). 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, 107-129.
3. Betsch, T., Haberstroh, S., & Höhle, C. (2002). Explaining routinized decision making-a review of theories and models. Theory and Psychology, 12, 453-488.
4. Betsch, T. (2005). Preference theory: An affect-based approach to recurrent decision making. In T. Betsch, & S. Haberstroh (Eds.), The routines of decision making (pp. 39-65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Brehmer, B. (1994). The psychology of linear judgement models. Acta Psychologica, 87, 137-154.
6. Bröder, A. (2000). 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, 1332-1346.
7. Bröder, A., & Newell, B. R. (2008). Challenging some common beliefs about cognitive costs: Empirical work within the adaptive toolbox metaphor. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 195-204.
8. Bröder, A., & Schiffer, S. (2006). Adaptive flexibility and maladaptive routines in selecting fast and frugal decision strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 904-918.
9. Bröder, A., & Gaissmaier, W. (2007). Sequential processing of cues in memory-based multiattribute decisions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 895-900.
10. Brownstein, A. L. (2003). Biased predecision processing. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 545-568.
11. Brownstein, A. L., Read, S. J., & Simon, D. (2004). Bias at the racetrack: Effects of individual expertise and task importance on predecision reevaluation of alternatives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 891-904.
12. Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and the probability theory in a functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62, 193-217.
13. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
14. Busemeyer, J. R., & Johnson, J. G. (2004). Computational models of decision making. In D. Koehler, & N. Harvey (Eds.), Handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 133-154). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
15. Carlson, K. A., & Russo, J. E. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 91-103.
16. Czerlinski, J., Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1999). How good are simple heuristics? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 97-118). New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Dawes, R. M. (1998). Behavioral decision making and judgment. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 497-548). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
18. Doherty, M. E., & Kurz, E. M. (1996). Social judgment theory. Thinking & Reasoning, 2, 109-140.
19. Doherty, M. E., & Brehmer, B. (1997). The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment: A thirty-year retrospective. In W. M. Goldstein, & R. M. Hogarth (Eds.), Research on judgment and decision making: Currents, connections, and controversies (pp. 537-551). New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. Dougherty, M. R. P., Gettys, C. F., & Ogden, E. E. (1999). MINERVA-DM: A memory process model for judgments of likelihood. Psychological Review, 106, 108-209.
21. Egan, L. C., Santos, L. R., & Bloom, P. (2007). The origins of cognitive dissonance: Evidence from children and monkeys. Psychological Science, 18, 978-983.
22. Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision, and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
23. Fishburn, P. C. (1974). Lexicographic orders, utilities, and decision rules: A survey. Management Science, 20, 1442-1472.
24. Frey, D. (1981). Informationssuche und Informationsbewertung bei Entscheidungen [Information search and evaluation in decision making]. Bern: Huber.
25. Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., & Kleinbölting, H. (1991). Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review, 98, 506-528.
26. Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103, 650-669.
27. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M. & ABC Group. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1999). Betting on one good reason: The take the best heuristic. In G. Gigerenzer, & P. M. Todd & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 75-95). New York: Oxford University Press.
29. Gigerenzer, G., & Brighton, H. (2009). Homo heuristicus: Why biased minds make better inferences. Topics in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 107-143.
30. Gilbert, D. (1991). How mental systems believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107-119.
31. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D. & Kahneman, D. (Eds.). (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
32. Glöckner, A. (2006). Automatische Prozesse bei Entscheidungen [Automatic processes in decision making]. Hamburg: Kovac.
33. Glöckner, A. (2007). Does intuition beat fast and frugal heuristics? A systematic empirical analysis. In H. Plessner, C. Betsch, & T. Betsch (Eds.), Intuition in judgment and decision making (pp. 309-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34. Glöckner, A. (2008). 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? Decision making, the human mind, and implications for institutions (pp. 259-284). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2008a). Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1055-1075.
36. Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2008b). 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, 107, 75-95.
37. Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2008c). Modeling option and strategy choices with connectionist networks: Towards an integrative model of automatic and deliberate decision making. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 215-228.
38. Glöckner, A., & Engel, C. (2008). Can we trust intuitive jurors? Standards of proof and the probative value of evidence in coherence based reasoning. MPI Collective Goods Preprint, No. 38. Available at SSRN.
39. Glöckner, A. (2009). Investigating intuitive and deliberate processes statistically: The multiple-measure maximum likelihood strategy classification method. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 186-199.
40. Glöckner, A. (in press). Multiple measure strategy classification: Outcomes, decision times and confidence ratings. In A. Glöckner, & C. L. M. Witteman (Eds.), Foundations for tracing intuition: Challenges and methods. London: Psychology Press & Routledge.
41. Glöckner, A., & Hodges, S. D. (2009). Parallel constraint satisfaction in memory-based decisions. Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, 2009/17.
42. Gluck, M. A., & Bower, G. H. (1988). From conditioning to category learning: An adaptive network model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 227-247.
43. Goldstein, D. G., Gigerenzer, G., Hogarth, R. M., Kacelnik, A., Kareev, Y., Klein, G., et al. (2001). Group report: Why and when do simple heuristics work? In G. Gigerenzer, & R. Selten (Eds.), Bounded rationality-the adaptive toolbox (pp. 123-145). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic. Psychological Review, 109, 75-90.
45. Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). The recognition heuristic-how ignorance makes us smart? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 37-58). New York: Oxford University Press.
46. Goldstein, W. M., & Hogarth, R. M. (1997). Judgment and decision research: Some historical context. In W. M. Goldstein, & R. M. Hogarth (Eds.), Research on judgment and decision making: Currents, connections, and controversies (pp. 3-65). New York: Cambridge University Press.
47. Gould, W., Pitblado, J., & Sribney, W. (2006). Maximum likelihood estimation with stata (3rd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
48. Hayes, A. F., & Cai, L. (2007). Using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: An introduction and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 709-722.
49. Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U., & Martignon, L. (1999). Quick estimation: Letting the environment do the work. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 209-234). New York: Oxford University Press.
50. Holyoak, K. J., & Simon, D. (1999). Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 3-31.
51. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13, 295-355.
52. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
53. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49-81). New York: Cambridge University Press.
54. Kunda, Z., & Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103, 284-308.
55. Lopes, L. L. (1992). Three misleading assumptions in the customary rhetoric of the bias literature. Theory & Psychology, 2, 231-236.
56. Maule, J. (2005). Re-framing decision framing. Presidential address at the 20th Biennial Conference on Subjective Probability, Utility and Decision Making, 22-24 August, Stockholm, Sweden.
57. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive model of context effects in letter perception. Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
58. Montgomery, H. (1989). From cognition to action: The search for dominance in decision making. In H. Montgomery, & O. Svenson (Eds.), Process and structure in human decision making (pp. 23-49). New York: Wiley.
59. Newell, B. R., & Bröder, A. (2008). Cognitive processes, models and metaphors in decision research. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 205-214.
60. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
61. Payne, J. W. (1982). Contingent decision behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 382-402.
62. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 534-552.
63. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review Psychology, 43, 87-131.
64. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
65. Popper, K. (1989). Logik der Forschung [The logic of scientific discovery] (9th ed.). Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
66. Read, S. J., Vanman, E. J., & Miller, L. C. (1997). Connectionism, parallel constraint satisfaction and Gestalt principles: (Re)introducting cognitive dynamics to social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 26-53.
67. Read, S. J., & Miller, L. C. (1998). On the dynamic construction of meaning: An interactive activation and competition model of social perception. In S. J. Read, & L. C. Miller (Eds.), Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior (pp. 27-70). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
68. Rieskamp, J. (2006). Perspectives of probabilistic inferences: Reinforcement learning and an adaptive network compared. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1355-1370.
69. Rieskamp, J. (2008). The importance of learning when making inferences. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 261-277.
70. Rieskamp, J., & Otto, P. E. (2006). SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 207-236.
71. Russo, J. E., & Dosher, B. A. (1983). Strategies for multiattribute binary choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 9, 676-696.
72. Russo, J. E., Meloy, M. G., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). Predecisional distortion of product information. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 438-452.
73. Shultz, T. R., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint satisfaction. Psychological Review, 103, 219-240.
74. Simon, D., & Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency theory to constraint satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 283-294.
75. Simon, D. (2004). A third view of the black box: Cognitive coherence in legal decision making. University of Chicago Law Review, 71, 511-586.
76. Simon, D., Krawczyk, D. C., & Holyoak, K. J. (2004a). Construction of preferences by constraint satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15, 331-336.
77. Simon, D. Pham, L. B., Le, Q. A., & Holyoak, K. J. (2002). The emergence of coherence over the course of decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1250-1260.
78. Simon, D., Snow, C. J., & Read, S. J. (2004b). The redux of cognitive consistency theories: Evidence judgments by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 814-837.
79. Simon, D., Krawczyk, D. C., Bleicher, A., & Holyoak, K. J. (2008). The transience of constructed preferences. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 1-14.
80. Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99-118.
81. Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
82. Slovic, P. (1995). The construction of preference. American Psychologist, 50, 364-371.
83. Svenson, O. (1992). Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre- and post-decision processes. Acta Psychologica, 80, 143-168.
84. Thagard, P. (1989). Explanatory coherence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 435-502.
85. Thagard, P., & Millgram, E. (1995). Inference to the best plan: A coherence theory of decision. In A. Ram, & D. B. Leake (Eds.), Goal-driven learning (pp. 439-454). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
86. Thagard, P., & Kunda, Z. (1998). Making sense of people: Coherence mechanisms. In S. J. Read, & L. C. Miller (Eds.), Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior (pp. 3-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
87. Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2003). Bounding rationality to the world. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 143-165.
88. Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79, 281-299.
89. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2001). The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review, 108, 550-592.
90. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice. Psychological Review, 111, 757-769.
91. Weber, E. U., Goldstein, W. M., & Barlas, S. (1995). And let us not forget memory: The role of memory processes and techniques in the study of judgment and choice. In J. R. Busemeyer, R. Hastie, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Decision making from a perspective of cognitive psychology (pp. 38-81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
92. Yates, J. F. (2003). Decision management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
93. Yates, J. F., & Tschirhart, M. D. (2006). Pecision-making expertise. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 421-438). New York: Cambridge University Press.