Contrasts and Interactions Redux: Five Easy Pieces

Rosnow, Ralph L.; Rosenthal, Robert

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00369.x

Cited by 55 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To control for multiple comparisons when performing whole-brain analyses, we applied a False Discovery Rate (FDR) threshold of q Ͻ 0.05 (with c( V) ϭ 1) and a 10 functional voxel cluster size minimum. In the case a conjunction analysis was used, we applied a minimum test statistic (Nichols et al, 2005). For visualization purposes, some analyses display BOLD signal time courses extracted using a deconvolution analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment

Ginther

Bonnie

Hoffman³

et al. 2016

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolved capacity for third-party punishment is considered crucial to the emergence and maintenance of elaborate human social organization and is central to the modern provision of fairness and justice within society. Although it is well established that the mental state of the offender and the severity of the harm he caused are the two primary predictors of punishment decisions, the precise cognitive and brain mechanisms by which these distinct components are evaluated and integrated into a punishment decision are poorly understood. Using fMRI, here we implement a novel experimental design to functionally dissociate the mechanisms underlying evaluation, integration, and decision that were conflated in previous studies of third-party punishment. Behaviorally, the punishment decision is primarily defined by a superadditive interaction between harm and mental state, with subjects weighing the interaction factor more than the single factors of harm and mental state. On a neural level, evaluation of harms engaged brain areas associated with affective and somatosensory processing, whereas mental state evaluation primarily recruited circuitry involved in mentalization. Harm and mental state evaluations are integrated in medial prefrontal and posterior cingulate structures, with the amygdala acting as a pivotal hub of the interaction between harm and mental state. This integrated information is used by the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at the time of the decision to assign an appropriate punishment through a distributed coding system. Together, these findings provide a blueprint of the brain mechanisms by which neutral third parties render punishment decisions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment

Ginther

Bonnie

Hoffman³

et al. 2016

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New contrasts were created out of the differences between the original contrast weights (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Results are based on the estimation task of Study 3.…”

Section: What We Have Learnedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgments of Risk Frequencies: Tests of Possible Cognitive Mechanisms.

Hertwig

Pachur

Kurzenhäuser

2005

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

149

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do people judge which of 2 risks claims more lives per year? The authors specified 4 candidate mechanisms and tested them against people's judgments in 3 risk environments. Two mechanisms, availability by recall and regressed frequency, conformed best to people's choices. The same mechanisms also accounted well for the mapping accuracy of estimates of absolute risk frequencies. Their nearly indistinguishable level of performance is remarkable given their different assumptions about the underlying cognitive processes and the fact that they give rise to different expectations regarding the accuracy of people's inferences. The authors discuss this seeming paradox, the lack of impact of financial incentives on judgmental accuracy, and the dominant interpretation of inaccurate inferences in terms of biased information processing.

show abstract

“…In proposing that "the availability of instances could be measured by the total number of instances retrieved or constructed in any given problem," Tversky and Kahneman (1973, p. 210) did not specify whether "instances" are types Note. New contrasts were created out of the differences between the original contrast weights (see Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1996). Results are based on the estimation task of Studies 1, 2, and 3. Letters used for calculating the contrasts were C, O, R, E, I, N, U, A, L B, S, E and G in Study 2.…”

Section: Types Versus Tokensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are judgments of the positional frequencies of letters systematically biased due to availability?

Sedlmeier¹,

Hertwig²,

Gigerenzer³

1998

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

R a l p h H e r t w i g a n d G e r d G i g e r e n z e r Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research How do people estimate whether a particular letter is more frequent in the 1st versus in a later position? The authors tested 2 precise versions of the availability hypothesis, a hypothesis that assumes that frequency processing occurs on the level of the phonological classes of vowels and consonants, and the regressed-frequencies hypothesis, which assumes monitoring of individual letters. Across 3 studies, it was found that (a) judgments of whether a letter is more frequent in the 1st or the 2rid position generally followed the actual proportions and (b) the estimated relative frequencies in the 1st versus the 2rid position closely agreed with the actual rank ordering, except for an overestimation of low and underestimation of high values. These results favor the regressed-frequencies hypothesis and challenge the conclusions about frequency judgments in the heuristics and biases literature.

show abstract

Contrasts and Interactions Redux: Five Easy Pieces

Cited by 55 publications

References 19 publications

Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment

Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment

Judgments of Risk Frequencies: Tests of Possible Cognitive Mechanisms.

Are judgments of the positional frequencies of letters systematically biased due to availability?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About