One-reason decision making in risky choice? A closer look at the priority heuristic
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2008, Vol 3, Issue 6
Abstract
Although many models for risky choices between gambles assume that information is somehow integrated, the recently proposed priority heuristic (PH) claims that choices are based on one piece of information only. That is, although the current reason for a choice according to the PH can vary, all other reasons are claimed to be ignored. However, the choices predicted by the PH and other pieces of information are often confounded, thus rendering critical tests of whether decisions are actually based on one reason only, impossible. The current study aims to remedy this problem by manipulating the number of reasons additionally in line with the choice implied by the PH. The results show that participants’ choices and decision times depend heavily on the number of reasons in line with the PH — thus contradicting the notion of non-compensatory, one-reason decision making.
Authors and Affiliations
Benjamin E. Hilbig
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677646
- DOI -
- Views 221
- Downloads 0
The collective intelligence of random small crowds: A partial replication of Kosinski et al. (2012)
We examined the trade-off between the cost of response redundancy and the gain in output quality on the popular crowdsourcing platform Mechanical Turk, as a partial replication of Kosinski et al. (2012) who demonstrated...
Exploring the time-saving bias: How drivers misestimate time saved when increasing speed
According to the time-saving bias, drivers underestimate the time saved when increasing from a low speed and overestimate the time saved when increasing from a relatively high speed. Previous research used a specific typ...
Information search in everyday decisions: The generalizability of the attraction search effect
The recently proposed integrated coherence-based decisions and search model (iCodes) makes predictions for search behavior in multi-attribute decision tasks beyond those of classic decision-making heuristics. More precis...
Justifying the judgment process affects neither judgment accuracy, nor strategy use
Decision quality is often evaluated based on whether decision makers can adequately explain the decision process. Accountability often improves judgment quality because decision makers weigh and integrate information mor...
Between me and we: The importance of self-profit versus social justifiability for ethical decision making
Current theories of dishonest behavior suggest that both individual profits and the availability of justifications drive cheating. Although some evidence hints that cheating behavior is most prevalent when both self-prof...