Rigorously testing multialternative decision field theory against random utility models

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 143, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 1331-1348

  Berkowitsch, Nicolas A J ^a   Scheibehenne, Benjamin ^a   Rieskamp, Jörg ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Context effects; MDFT; Preferences; Process models; Random utility models

Indexed keywords

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84898626337     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0035159     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Aaker, J. (1991). The negative attraction effect? A study of the attraction effect under judgment and choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 462-469.
2. Adamowicz, W., Louviere, J., & Williams, M. (1994). Combining revealed and stated preference methods for valuing environmental amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26, 271-292. doi:10.1006/jeem.1994.1017
3. Attneave, F. (1950). Dimensions of similarity. American Journal of Psychology, 63, 516-556. doi:10.2307/1418869
4. Berkowitsch, N. A. J., Scheibehenne, B., Matthäus, M., & Rieskamp, J. (2013). Determining the similarity between multiattribute options: A generalized similarity function. Manuscript submitted for publication.
5. Bowler, S., Karp, J. A., & Donovan, T. (2010). Strategic coalition voting: Evidence from New Zealand. Electoral Studies, 29, 350-357. doi: 10.1016/j.electstud.2010.03.001
6. Browne, M. W. (2000). Cross-validation methods. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 108-132. doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1279
7. Busemeyer, J. R., Barkan, R., Mehta, S., & Chaturvedi, A. (2007). Context effects and models of preferential choice: Implications for consumer behavior. Marketing Theory, 7, 39-58. doi:10.1177/1470593107073844
8. Busemeyer, J. R., & Diederich, A. (2002). Survey of decision field theory. Mathematical Social Sciences, 43, 345-370. doi:10.1016/S0165-4896(02)00016-1
9. Busemeyer, J. R., Jessup, R. K., Johnson, J. G., & Townsend, J. T. (2006). Building bridges between neural models and complex decision making behavior. Neural Networks, 19, 1047-1058. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2006 .05.043
10. 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. doi:10.1037/0033-295X .100.3.432
11. Busemeyer, J. R., & Wang, Y. (2000). Model comparisons and model selections based on generalization criterion methodology. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 171-189. doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1282
12. Carmon, Z., & Simonson, I. (1998). Price-quality trade-offs in choice versus matching: New insights into the prominence effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7, 323-343. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0704_02
13. Chandukala, S. R., Kim, J., Otter, T., Rossi, P. E., & Allenby, G. M. (2007). Choice models in marketing: Economic assumptions, challenges and trends. Foundations and Trends in Marketing, 2, 97-184. doi: 10.1561/1700000008
14. Daganzo, C. (1980). Multinomial probit. New York, NY: Academic Press.
15. Dhar, R., Nowlis, S. M., & Sherman, S. J. (2000). Trying hard or hardly trying: An analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 189-200. doi:10.1207/S15327663JCP0904_1
16. Diederich, A. (2010). Mathematical psychology. In I. B. Weiner & W. E. Craighead (Eds.), The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology (4th ed., pp. 971-974). New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9780470479216 .corpsy0532
17. Forstmann, B. U., Anwander, A., Schäfer, A., Neumann, J., Brown, S., Wagenmakers, E.-J., . . . Turner, R. (2010). Cortico-striatal connections predict control over speed and accuracy in perceptual decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 15916-15920. doi:10.1073/pnas.1004932107
18. Gil, J. M., & Sánchez, M. (1997). Consumer preferences for wine attributes: A conjoint approach. British Food Journal, 99, 3-11. doi: 10.1108/00070709710158825
19. Gluth, S., Rieskamp, J., & Büchel, C. (2012). Deciding when to decide: Time-variant sequential sampling models explain the emergence of value-based decisions in the human brain. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 10686-10698. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0727-12.2012
20. Gluth, S., Rieskamp, J., & Büchel, C. (2013). Classic EEG motor potentials track the emergence of value-based decisions. NeuroImage, 79, 394-403. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.005
21. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5, 103-123. doi:10.1086/208721
22. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practice. Journal of Marketing, 54, 3-19. doi:10.2307/1251756
23. Hanley, N., Wright, R. E., & Adamowicz, V. (1998). Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 11, 413-428. doi:10.1023/A:1008287310583
24. Hausman, J. A., & Wiese, D. A. (1978). A conditional probit model for qualitative choice: Discrete decisions recognizing interdependence and heterogeneous preferences. Econometrica, 46, 403-426. doi:10.2307/1913909
25. Heath, T. B., & Chatterjee, S. (1995). Asymmetric decoy effects on lower-quality versus higher-quality brands: Meta analytic and experimental evidence. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 268-284. doi: 10.1086/209449
26. Hensher, D. A. (1994). Stated preference analysis of travel choices: The state of practice. Transportation, 21, 107-133. doi:10.1007/ BF01098788
27. Highhouse, S. (1996). Context-dependent selection: The effects of decoy and phantom job candidates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 68-76. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0006
28. Highhouse, S. (1997). Understanding and improving job-finalist choice: The relevance of behavioral decision research. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 449-470. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(97)90029-2
29. Hotaling, J. M., Busemeyer, J. R., & Li, J. (2010). Theoretical developments in decision field theory: Comment on Tsetsos, Usher, and Chater (2010). Psychological Review, 117, 1294-1298. doi:10.1037/a0020401
30. Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90-98. doi:10.1086/208899
31. Huber, J., & Puto, C. (1983). Market boundaries and product choice: Illustrating attraction and substitution effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 31-44. doi:10.1086/208943
32. Johnson, J. G., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2010). Decision making under risk and uncertainty. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1, 736-749. doi:10.1002/wcs.76
33. Kamenica, E. (2008). Contextual inferences in markets: On the informational content of product lines. American Economic Review, 98, 2127-2149. doi:10.1257/aer.98.5.2127
34. Karp, J. A. (2009). Candidate effects and spill-over in mixed systems: Evidence from New Zealand. Electoral Studies, 28, 41-50. doi:10.1016/ j.electstud.2008.06.012
35. Kivetz, R., Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. (2004a). Extending compromise effect models to complex buying situations and other context effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 262-268. doi:10.1509/jmkr.41.3 .262.35993
36. Kivetz, R., Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. (2004b). Models for capturing the compromise effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 237-257. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.41.3.237.35990
37. Koistinen, L., Pouta, E., Heikkilä, J., Forsman-Hugg, S., Kotro, J., Mäkelä, J., & Niva, M. (2013). The impact of fat content, production methods and carbon footprint information on consumer preferences for minced meat. Food Quality and Preference, 29, 126 -136. doi:10.1016/j .foodqual.2013.03.007
38. Kruschke, J. K. (2011a). Bayesian assessment of null values via parameter estimation and model comparison. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 299-312. doi:10.1177/1745691611406925
39. Kruschke, J. K. (2011b). Doing Bayesian data analysis. A tutorial with R and BUGS. Burlington, MA: Academic Press.
40. Lewandowsky, S., & Farrell, S. (2011). Computational modeling in cognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41. Lin, C.-H., Sun, Y.-C., Chuang, S.-C., & Su, H.-J. (2008). Time pressure and the compromise and attraction effects in choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 35, 348-352.
42. Loureiro, M. L., & Umberger, W. J. (2005). Assessing consumer preferences for country-of-origin labeling. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 37, 49-63.
43. Loureiro, M. L., & Umberger, W. J. (2007). A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability. Food Policy, 32, 496-514. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.11.006
44. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. Oxford, England: Wiley.
45. Marley, A. A. J., Flynn, T. N., & Louviere, J. J. (2008). Probabilistic models of set-dependent and attribute-level best-worst choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 52, 281-296. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2008.02.002
46. Marley, A. A. J., & Pihlens, D. (2012). Models of best-worst choice and ranking among multiattribute options (profiles). Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56, 24-34. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2011.09.001
47. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive acitivation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407. doi:10.1037/0033-295X .88.5.375
48. McFadden, D. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105-142). New York, NY: Academic Press.
49. McFadden, D. (2001). Economic choices. American Economic Review, 91, 351-378. doi:10.1257/aer.91.3.351
50. Menard, S. (2004). Six approaches to calculating standardized logistic regression coefficients. American Statistician, 58, 218 -223. doi: 10.1198/000313004X946
51. Mosteller, F., & Nogee, P. (1951). An experimental measurement of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 59, 371-404. doi:10.1086/257106
52. Nownes, A. J. (1992). Primaries, general elections, and voter turnout: A multinomial logit model of the decision to vote. American Politics Research, 20, 205-226. doi:10.1177/1532673X9202000204
53. Orhun, A. Y. (2009). Optimal product line design when consumers exhibit choice-set dependent preferences. Marketing Science, 28, 868-886. doi:10.1287/mksc.1080.0449
54. Otter, T., Johnson, J., Rieskamp, J., Allenby, G. M., Brazell, J. D., Diederich, A., . . . Townsend, J. (2008). Sequential sampling models of choice: Some recent advances. Marketing Letters, 19, 255-267. doi: 10.1007/s11002-008-9039-0
55. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/ CBO9781139173933
56. Pettibone, J. C. (2012). Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 513-523.
57. Phillips, K. A., Maddala, T., & Johnson, F. R. (2002). Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: An application to HIV testing. Health Services Researches, 37, 1681-1705. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.01115
58. Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111-163. doi:10.2307/271063
59. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59
60. Reutskaja, E., Nagel, R., Camerer, C. F., & Rangel, A. (2011). Search dynamics in consumer choice under time pressure: An eye-tracking study. American Economic Review, 101, 900-926. doi:10.1257/aer.101.2.900
61. Rieskamp, J. (2008). The probabilistic nature of preferential choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1446-1456. doi:10.1037/a0013646
62. Rieskamp, J., Busemeyer, J. R., & Mellers, B. A. (2006). Extending the bounds of rationality: Evidence and theories of preferential choice. Journal of Economic Literature, 44, 631-661. doi:10.1257/jel.44.3.631
63. Roberts, D. C., Boyer, T. A., & Lusk, J. L. (2008). Preferences for environmental quality under uncertainty. Ecological Economics, 66, 584-593. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.05.010
64. Roe, R. M., Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (2001). Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionist model of decision making. Psychological Review, 108, 370-392. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.370
65. Rooderkerk, R. P., van Heerde, H. J., & Bijmolt, T. H. A. (2011). Incorporating context effects into a choice model. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 767-780. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.4.767
66. Ryan, M., & Farrar, S. (2000). Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 320, 1530-1533. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1530
67. Scheibehenne, B., Rieskamp, J., & Gonzalez-Vallejo, C. (2009). Cognitive models of choice: Comparing decision field theory to the proportional difference model. Cognitive Science, 33, 911-939. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01034.x
68. Scheibehenne, B., Rieskamp, J., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2013). Testing adaptive toolbox models: A Bayesian hierarchical approach. Psychological Review, 120, 39-64. doi:10.1037/a0030777
69. Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992). Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 281-295. doi:10.2307/3172740
70. Slaughter, J. E. (2007). Effects of two selection batteries on decoy effects in job-finalist choice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 76-90. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2007.00148.x
71. Slaughter, J. E., Bagger, J., & Li, A. (2006). Context effects on groupbased employee selection decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 47-59. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.003
72. Slaughter, J. E., & Highhouse, S. (2003). Does matching up features mess up job choice? Boundary conditions on attribute-salience effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 1-15. doi:10.1002/bdm.428
73. Slaughter, J. E., Kausel, E. E., & Quiñones, M. A. (2011). The decoy effect as a covert influence tactic. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24, 249-266. doi:10.1002/bdm.687
74. Slaughter, J. E., Sinar, E. F., & Highhouse, S. (1999). Decoy effects and attribute-level inferences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 823-828. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.823
75. Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1974). Who accepts Savage's axiom? Behavioral Science, 19, 368-373. doi:10.1002/bs.3830190603
76. Soltani, A., De Martino, B., & Camerer, C. (2012). A range-normalization model of context-dependent choice: A new model and evidence. PLOS Computational Biology, 8, e1002607. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002607
77. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36B, 111-147.
78. Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Diekmann, K. A. (2002). Job decision inconsistencies involving social comparison information: The role of dominating alternatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1149-1158. doi:10.1037/ 0021-9010.87.6.1149
79. Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 101, 266-270. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.266
80. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
81. Train, K. (1978). A validation test of a disaggregate mode choice model. Transportation Research, 12, 167-174. doi:10.1016/0041-1647(78)90120-X
82. Train, K. E. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511753930
83. Trueblood, J. S. (2012). Multialternative context effects obtained using an inference task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 962-968. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0288-9
84. Trueblood, J. S., Brown, S. D., & Heathcote, A. (2013). The multi-attribute linear ballistic accumulator model of decision-making. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceeding of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3581-3586). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
85. Trueblood, J. S., Brown, S. D., Heathcote, A., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2013). Not just for consumers: Context effects are fundamental to decision making. Psychological Science, 24, 901-908. doi:10.1177/ 0956797612464241
86. Tsetsos, K., Chater, N., & Usher, M. (2012). Salience driven value integration explains decision biases and preference reversals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 9659-9664. doi:10.1073/pnas .1119569109
87. Tsetsos, K., Usher, M., & Chater, N. (2010). Preference reversal in multiattribute choice. Psychological Review, 117, 1275-1291. doi:10.1037/ a0020580
88. Tversky, A. (1972a). Choice by elimination. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 9, 341-367. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(72)90011-9
89. Tversky, A. (1972b). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79, 281-299. doi:10.1037/h0032955
90. Tversky, A., Sattah, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384. doi:10.1037/ 0033-295X.95.3.371
91. Tversky, A., & Simonson, I. (1993). Context-dependent preferences. Management Science, 39, 1179-1189. doi:10.1287/mnsc.39.10.1179
92. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice. Psychological Review, 111, 757-769. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.757
93. Vickers, D. (1970). Evidence for an accumulator of psychophysical discrimination. Ergonomics, 13, 37-58. doi:10.1080/00140137008931117
94. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
95. Wardman, M. (1988). A comparison of revealed preference and stated preference models of travel behavior. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 22, 71-91.
96. Wedell, D. H. (1991). Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 767-778. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.17.4.767