Parallel Constraint Satisfaction in Memory-Based Decisions

A. Glöckner, Sara D. Hodges
{"title":"Parallel Constraint Satisfaction in Memory-Based Decisions","authors":"A. Glöckner, Sara D. Hodges","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1423728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Three studies sought to investigate decision strategies in memory-based decisions and to test the predictions of the parallel constraint satisfaction (PCS) model for decision making (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008). Time pressure was manipulated and the model was compared against simple heuristics (take the best and equal weight) and a weighted additive strategy. From PCS we predicted that fast intuitive decision making is based on compensatory information integration and that decision time increases and confidence decreases with increasing inconsistency in the decision task. In line with these predictions we observed a predominant usage of compensatory strategies under all time-pressure conditions and even with decision times as short as 1.7 s. For a substantial number of participants, choices and decision times were best explained by PCS, but there was also evidence for use of simple heuristics. The time-pressure manipulation did not significantly affect decision strategies. Overall, the results highlight intuitive, automatic processes in decision making and support the idea that human information-processing capabilities are less severely bounded than often assumed.","PeriodicalId":247961,"journal":{"name":"Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods Research Paper Series","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"54","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1423728","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 54

Abstract

Three studies sought to investigate decision strategies in memory-based decisions and to test the predictions of the parallel constraint satisfaction (PCS) model for decision making (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008). Time pressure was manipulated and the model was compared against simple heuristics (take the best and equal weight) and a weighted additive strategy. From PCS we predicted that fast intuitive decision making is based on compensatory information integration and that decision time increases and confidence decreases with increasing inconsistency in the decision task. In line with these predictions we observed a predominant usage of compensatory strategies under all time-pressure conditions and even with decision times as short as 1.7 s. For a substantial number of participants, choices and decision times were best explained by PCS, but there was also evidence for use of simple heuristics. The time-pressure manipulation did not significantly affect decision strategies. Overall, the results highlight intuitive, automatic processes in decision making and support the idea that human information-processing capabilities are less severely bounded than often assumed.
基于记忆决策的并行约束满足
三项研究试图调查基于记忆的决策中的决策策略,并测试并行约束满足(PCS)模型对决策的预测(Glöckner & Betsch, 2008)。控制时间压力,并将模型与简单启发式(取最佳和等权)和加权加性策略进行比较。从PCS中我们预测了快速直觉决策是基于补偿性信息整合的,决策时间随着决策任务不一致性的增加而增加,置信度随着决策任务不一致性的增加而降低。与这些预测一致,我们观察到补偿策略在所有时间压力条件下的主要使用,甚至决策时间短至1.7秒。对于相当数量的参与者来说,选择和决策时间最好用PCS来解释,但也有证据表明使用简单的启发式。时间压力操纵对决策策略没有显著影响。总的来说,研究结果强调了决策过程中的直觉和自动过程,并支持了人类信息处理能力不像通常认为的那样受到严格限制的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信