Judgment: a cognitive processing perspective

Pachur, Thorsten; Bröder, Arndt

doi:10.1002/wcs.1259

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 175 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Humans use heuristics to overcome the bounds of rationality ( Gigerenzer et al, 1999 ). Individual variability in decision strategy use is a central research problems in this area ( Ford et al, 1989 ; Pachur and Bröder, 2013 ) and our study helps to understand the sources of this variability by employing EEG as a fine grained method to analyze the dynamics of pre-decisional information processing and choice. It provides initial evidence that the P3 and N1 ERP components indexing attention allocation are associated with the use of rational and heuristic choice strategies and can be further studied as early correlates of strategy preference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Signatures of Rational and Heuristic Choice Strategies: A Single Trial ERP Analysis

Wichary

Magnuski

Oleksy

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In multi-attribute choice, people use heuristics to simplify decision problems. We studied the use of heuristic and rational strategies and their electrophysiological correlates. Since previous work linked the P3 ERP component to attention and decision making, we were interested whether the amplitude of this component is associated with decision strategy use. To this end, we recorded EEG when participants performed a two-alternative choice task, where they could acquire decision cues in a sequential manner and use them to make choices. We classified participants’ choices as consistent with a rational Weighted Additive rule (WADD) or a simple heuristic Take The Best (TTB). Participants differed in their preference for WADD and TTB. Using a permutation-based single trial approach, we analyzed EEG responses to consecutive decision cues and their relation to the individual strategy preference. The preference for WADD over TTB was associated with overall higher signal amplitudes to decision cues in the P3 time window. Moreover, the preference for WADD was associated with similar P3 amplitudes to consecutive cues, whereas the preference for TTB was associated with substantial decreases in P3 amplitudes to consecutive cues. We also found that the preference for TTB was associated with enhanced N1 component to cues that discriminated decision alternatives, suggesting very early attention allocation to such cues by TTB users. Our results suggest that preference for either WADD or TTB has an early neural signature reflecting differences in attentional weighting of decision cues. In light of recent findings and hypotheses regarding P3, we interpret these results as indicating the involvement of catecholamine arousal systems in shaping predecisional information processing and strategy selection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Signatures of Rational and Heuristic Choice Strategies: A Single Trial ERP Analysis

Wichary

Magnuski

Oleksy

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is an emerging consensus that people use simple one-cue heuristics under certain circumstances, such as when they are under time pressure or when they have to retrieve information from memory (for an overview, see Pachur & Bröder, 2013). At the same time, additive integration of multiple cues occurs in various judgment domains (e.g., Anderson, 1981Anderson, , 2013.…”

Section: Cue Integration In Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous utilization of multiple cues in judgments of learning

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much evidence that metacognitive judgments, such as people's predictions of their future memory performance (judgments of learning, JOLs), are inferences based on cues and heuristics. However, relatively little is known about whether and when people integrate multiple cues in one metacognitive judgment or focus on a single cue without integrating further information. The current set of experiments systematically addressed whether and to what degree people integrate multiple extrinsic and intrinsic cues in JOLs. Experiment 1 varied two cues: number of study presentations (1 vs. 2) and font size (18 point vs. 48 point). Results revealed that people integrated both cues in their JOLs. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the two word characteristics concreteness (abstract vs. concrete) and emotionality (neutral vs. emotional) were integrated in JOLs. Experiment 3 showed that people integrated all four cues in their JOLs when manipulated simultaneously. Finally, Experiment 4 confirmed integration of three cues that varied on a continuum rather than in two easily distinguishable levels. These results demonstrate that people have a remarkable capacity to integrate multiple cues in metacognitive judgments. In addition, our findings render an explanation of cue effects on JOLs in terms of demand characteristics implausible.

show abstract

“…An alternative theory to cost-benefit analysis (ie, for how judgments are made based on multiple cues) is the process-level cognitive perspective [46]; this has been made famous by the heuristics and biases research program from behavioral economics [47]. Heuristics are rapid cognitive strategies or shortcuts (either explicit or subconscious) formulated as practical, bounded rational decision systems for multiple cues that can be more transparent than complex cost-benefit analyses, for example, hierarchical lexicographic decision models [48].…”

Section: Integration Versus Heuristics: Lay Judgments Based On Multiple Cuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spelling Errors and Shouting Capitalization Lead to Additive Penalties to Trustworthiness of Online Health Information: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons

Witchel¹,

Thompson²,

Jones³

et al. 2020

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The written format and literacy competence of screen-based texts can interfere with the perceived trustworthiness of health information in online forums, independent of the semantic content. Unlike in professional content, the format in unmoderated forums can regularly hint at incivility, perceived as deliberate rudeness or casual disregard toward the reader, for example, through spelling errors and unnecessary emphatic capitalization of whole words (online shouting). Objective This study aimed to quantify the comparative effects of spelling errors and inappropriate capitalization on ratings of trustworthiness independently of lay insight and to determine whether these changes act synergistically or additively on the ratings. Methods In web-based experiments, 301 UK-recruited participants rated 36 randomized short stimulus excerpts (in the format of information from an unmoderated health forum about multiple sclerosis) for trustworthiness using a semantic differential slider. A total of 9 control excerpts were compared with matching error-containing excerpts. Each matching error-containing excerpt included 5 instances of misspelling, or 5 instances of inappropriate capitalization (shouting), or a combination of 5 misspelling plus 5 inappropriate capitalization errors. Data were analyzed in a linear mixed effects model. Results The mean trustworthiness ratings of the control excerpts ranged from 32.59 to 62.31 (rating scale 0-100). Compared with the control excerpts, excerpts containing only misspellings were rated as being 8.86 points less trustworthy, those containing inappropriate capitalization were rated as 6.41 points less trustworthy, and those containing the combination of misspelling and capitalization were rated as 14.33 points less trustworthy (P<.001 for all). Misspelling and inappropriate capitalization show an additive effect. Conclusions Distinct indicators of incivility independently and additively penalize the perceived trustworthiness of online text independently of lay insight, eliciting a medium effect size.

show abstract

Judgment: a cognitive processing perspective

Cited by 20 publications

References 175 publications

Neural Signatures of Rational and Heuristic Choice Strategies: A Single Trial ERP Analysis

Neural Signatures of Rational and Heuristic Choice Strategies: A Single Trial ERP Analysis

Simultaneous utilization of multiple cues in judgments of learning

Spelling Errors and Shouting Capitalization Lead to Additive Penalties to Trustworthiness of Online Health Information: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About