Cognitive determinants of affective forecasting errors

Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2010, Vol 5, Issue 5

Abstract

Often to the detriment of human decision making, people are prone to an impact bias when making affective forecasts, overestimating the emotional consequences of future events. The cognitive processes underlying the impact bias, and methods for correcting it, have been debated and warrant further exploration. In the present investigation, we examined both individual differences and contextual variables associated with cognitive processing in affective forecasting for an election. Results showed that the perceived importance of the event and working memory capacity were both associated with an increased impact bias for some participants, whereas retrieval interference had no relationship with bias. Additionally, an experimental manipulation effectively reduced biased forecasts, particularly among participants who were most distracted thinking about peripheral life events. These findings have theoretical implications for understanding the impact bias, highlight the importance of individual differences in affective forecasting, and have ramifications for future decision making research. The possible functional role of the impact bias is discussed within the context of evolutionary psychology.

Authors and Affiliations

Michael Hoerger, Stuart W. Quirk, Richard E. Lucas and Thomas H. Carr

Keywords

Related Articles

Cultural differences in risk: The group facilitation effect

We compared South Koreans with Australians in order to characterize cultural differences in attitudes and choices regarding risk, at both the individual and group levels. Our results showed that Australians, when assesse...

Reflective liberals and intuitive conservatives: A look at the Cognitive Reflection Test and ideology

Prior research finds that liberals and conservatives process information differently. Predispositions toward intuitive versus reflective thinking may help explain this individual level variation. There have been few dire...

Incentives in religious performance: a stochastic dominance approach

Using a stochastic dominance approach in an international dataset of about 10,000 Catholic subjects, we show that incentives (based on absolute belief) play a crucial role in religious practice (church attendance and pra...

Attribute framing affects the perceived fairness of health care allocation principles

Health care resource allocation is a central moral issue in health policy, and opinions about it have been studied extensively. Allocation situations have typically been described and presented in a positive manner (i.e....

Modeling sequential context effects in judgment analysis:

In this article a broad perspective incorporating elements of time series theory is presented for conceptualizing the data obtained in multi-trial judgment experiments. Recent evidence suggests that sequential context ef...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP677751
  • DOI -
  • Views 141
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Michael Hoerger, Stuart W. Quirk, Richard E. Lucas and Thomas H. Carr (2010). Cognitive determinants of affective forecasting errors. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), -. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-677751