Judgment and Decision Making最新文献_第3页

I want to believe: Prior beliefs influence judgments about the effectiveness of both alternative and scientific medicine 我想要相信:先前的信念会影响人们对替代医学和科学医学有效性的判断

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2022.3

Lucía Vicente, Fernando Blanco, H. Matute

{"title":"I want to believe: Prior beliefs influence judgments about the effectiveness of both alternative and scientific medicine","authors":"Lucía Vicente, Fernando Blanco, H. Matute","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2022.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2022.3","url":null,"abstract":"Previous research suggests that people may develop stronger causal illusions when the existence of a causal relationship is consistent with their prior beliefs. In the present study, we hypothesized that prior pseudoscientific beliefs will influence judgments about the effectiveness of both alternative medicine and scientific medicine. Participants (N = 98) were exposed to an adaptation of the standard causal illusion task in which they had to judge whether two fictitious treatments, one described as conventional medicine and the other as alternative medicine, could heal the crises caused by two different syndromes. Since both treatments were completely ineffective, those believing that any of the two medicines worked were exhibiting a causal illusion. Participants also responded to the Pseudoscience Endorsement Scale (PES) and some questions about trust in alternative therapies that were taken from the Survey on the Social Perception of Science and Technology conducted by FECYT. The results replicated the causal illusion effect and extended them by revealing an interaction between the prior pseudoscientific beliefs and the scientific/pseudoscientific status of the fictitious treatment. Individuals reporting stronger pseudoscientific beliefs were more vulnerable to the illusion in both scenarios, whereas participants with low adherence to pseudoscientific beliefs seemed to be more resistant to the illusion in the alternative medicine scenario.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56717106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The potential and pitfalls of unit asking in reducing scope insensitivity 单位询问在减少范围不敏感方面的潜力和缺陷

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.27

Hajdi Moche, Arvid Erlandsson, Stephan Dickert, D. Västfjäll

{"title":"The potential and pitfalls of unit asking in reducing scope insensitivity","authors":"Hajdi Moche, Arvid Erlandsson, Stephan Dickert, D. Västfjäll","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2023.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.27","url":null,"abstract":"This article revisits and further investigates the extent to which scope insensitivity in helping contexts can be reduced by the unit asking (UA) method. UA is an intervention that first asks people to help one unit and then asks for willingness to help multiple units. In 3 studies (N = 3,442), participants took on the role of policymakers to allocate help (motivation to help and willingness to pay) to local aid projects. They underwent either UA or a control condition (in which they stated their willingness to help only to the multiple units). Against expectations, the first 2 studies found a reversed UA effect for helping motivation, such that help decreased when participants were in the UA condition. However, the third study found a UA effect for helping motivation when participants made the sequential assessments within one project (when the individual unit belonged to the multiple units-group), rather than between projects (when the individual unit belonged to another group). Thus, our results suggest that the 2 assessments critical for the UA method should be done within the same project rather than between 2 projects to successfully reduce scope insensitivity. Further, the age of the unit (child or adult), the number of the unit(s), the composition of the group (homogeneous or heterogeneous), and the size of the group did not substantially reduce scope insensitivity with UA.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56717963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Magical contagion beliefs operate in reactions of Americans to COVID-19 神奇的传染信念在美国人对COVID-19的反应中起作用

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.4

P. Rozin

引用次数: 0

Virtual reality for philanthropy: A promising tool to innovate fundraising – CORRIGENDUM 慈善事业的虚拟现实:创新筹款的有前途的工具-勘误

3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.35

Nina M. Sooter, Giuseppe Ugazio

引用次数: 0

Choosing more aggressive commitment contracts for others than for the self 为他人而不是自己选择更具侵略性的承诺契约

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.1

Craig I. Brimhall, David Tannenbaum, Eric M. VanEpps

引用次数: 0

Contextual effects in salary satisfaction 薪酬满意度的语境效应

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.26

M. Birnbaum, Julien Rouvere

{"title":"Contextual effects in salary satisfaction","authors":"M. Birnbaum, Julien Rouvere","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2023.26","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.26","url":null,"abstract":"This article reports a series of studies of judgments of satisfaction with salary, manipulating the distribution of salaries of others doing the same work. The experiments were designed to compare 6 theories of contextual effects in judgment, including adaptation-level theory, correlation–regression theory, inferred distribution (ID) theory, decision by sampling (DbS), ensemble (EN) theory, and range–frequency (RF) theory. Manipulations of the frequency distribution using cubic density functions produce a double crossover of curves relating judgments to salaries; this double crossover violates implications of 4 of the theories but remains consistent with DbS and RF theories. ID theory assumes that rank is inferred from the mean and endpoints, so it fails to describe the double crossover. Manipulations of the endpoints produce changes in the heights and slopes of the curves, which are not explained by DbS and are partially inconsistent with EN theory. EN theory implies no effect of the rank of a salary and assumes that endpoints only affect judgments of salaries on the same side of the mean, contrary to the results. RF theory implies that ratings of stimuli holding the same ranks in 2 contexts with differing endpoints should be linearly related, and the data appeared consistent with this implication. RF theory is the only theory that gives a consistent account of all of the results. RF theory can be extended in order to estimate the effective context, which appears to differ systematically between people according to their full-time incomes.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56717958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Fairness is based on quality, not just quantity 公平的基础是质量，而不仅仅是数量

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.20

J. Zenkić, Kobe Millet, N. Mead

{"title":"Fairness is based on quality, not just quantity","authors":"J. Zenkić, Kobe Millet, N. Mead","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2023.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.20","url":null,"abstract":"According to decades of research, whether negotiations succeed depends on how much of the stake each person will get. Yet, real-world stakes often consist of resources that vary on quality, not just quantity. While it may appear obvious that people should reject qualitatively inferior offers, just as they reject quantitatively unequal offers, it is less clear why. Across three incentive-compatible studies (N = 1,303) using the ultimatum game, we evaluate three possible reasons for why people reject qualitatively unequal negotiation offers (that are 50% of the stake): fairness, mere inequality, or badness. Data across the three studies are consistent with the fairness account. Casting doubt on the possibility that people reject qualitatively unequal offers merely because they are ‘bad’, Studies 1 and 2 found that participants were more likely to reject the same coins when these were inferior (e.g., 200 × 5¢ coins) to the negotiation partner’s coins (e.g., 5 × $2 coins) than when both parties received the same undesirable coins (e.g., both received 200 × 5¢ coins). Supporting a fairness explanation, rejection rates of the qualitatively inferior offer were higher when the proposal came from a human (vs. a computer), suggesting that rejection stemmed in part from a desire to punish the negotiation partner for unfair treatment (Study 3). Nevertheless, some participants still rejected the unequal offer from a computer, suggesting that mere inequality matters as well. In sum, the findings highlight that quality, not just quantity, is important for attaining fair negotiation outcomes.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56717726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Comparing input interfaces to elicit belief distributions 比较输入接口以引出信念分布

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.21

Paolo Crosetto, Thomas de Haan

{"title":"Comparing input interfaces to elicit belief distributions","authors":"Paolo Crosetto, Thomas de Haan","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2023.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.21","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces a new software interface to elicit belief distributions of any shape: Click-and-Drag. The interface was tested against the state of the art in the experimental literature—a text-based interface and multiple sliders—and in the online forecasting industry—a distribution-manipulation interface similar to the one used by the most popular crowd-forecasting website. By means of a pre-registered experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk, quantitative data on the accuracy of reported beliefs in a series of induced-value scenarios varying by granularity, shape, and time constraints, as well as subjective data on user experience were collected. Click-and-Drag outperformed all other interfaces by accuracy and speed, and was self-reported as being more intuitive and less frustrating, confirming the pre-registered hypothesis. Aside of the pre-registered results, Click-and-Drag generated the least drop-out rate from the task, and scored best in a sentiment analysis of an open-ended general question. Further, the interface was used to collect homegrown predictions on temperature in New York City in 2022 and 2042. Click-and-Drag elicited distributions were smoother with less idiosyncratic spikes. Free and open source, ready to use oTree, Qualtrics and Limesurvey plugins for Click-and-Drag, and all other tested interfaces are available at https://beliefelicitation.github.io/.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56717742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Connecting the dots: Nonlinear patterns in the presence of symbolic and nonsymbolic numerical standards 连接点:存在符号和非符号数值标准的非线性模式

3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.31

Roland Imhoff, Paul Barker

引用次数: 0

Bridging the gap between the economics lab and the field: Dictator games and donations 弥合经济学实验室和实际领域之间的鸿沟:独裁者游戏和捐赠

IF 2.5 3区心理学

Judgment and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1017/jdm.2023.19

Xinghua Wang, D. Navarro-Martinez

引用次数: 2