Journal of Behavioral Decision Making最新文献_第2页

Acting Wastefully but Feeling Satisfied: Understanding Waste Aversion 行为浪费但感觉满足：理解厌恶浪费

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70011

Ro'i Zultan, Ori Weisel, Yaniv Shani

{"title":"Acting Wastefully but Feeling Satisfied: Understanding Waste Aversion","authors":"Ro'i Zultan, Ori Weisel, Yaniv Shani","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70011","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Paying more than one could have paid to obtain the same outcome is wasteful. In four experiments, we show that waste aversion can lead people to prefer a <i>more wasteful</i> outcome over a more frugal outcome, as long as it eliminates the <i>feeling</i> of wastefulness. In Study 1, we measured participants' satisfaction with lottery outcomes to find that they are less satisfied with their obtained outcome relative to an inferior, dominated, outcome—if they are aware of a counter-factual in which they could have paid less to achieve the dominant outcome. Study 2 revealed that responsibility for the decision that led to the outcome does not intensify the effect, suggesting that wastefulness is a more prominent explanation for the effect than regret. Study 3 extended the results from outcome satisfaction to decisions. Participants altered their choice of whether to continue or terminate searching for an apartment based on their awareness of a counterfactual that renders the process leading to the outcome as wasteful or not. Waste aversion leads participants to extend their search beyond what they would do based purely on their preferences and expectations. Study 4 replicated these findings with payoff-relevant decisions. Taken together, these four studies establish that waste aversion leads to higher satisfaction with dominated outcomes in real-world experiences. The effect does not rely on decision regret, and may lead to suboptimal decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.70011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143404614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Framing Biases in Plea Bargaining Decisions in Those With and Without Criminal Involvement: Tests of Theoretical Assumptions 有和没有犯罪参与的辩诉交易决策中的框架偏见：理论假设的检验

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-02-02 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70008

Valerie F. Reyna, Krystia Reed, Alisha Meschkow, Vincent Calderon, Rebecca K. Helm

{"title":"Framing Biases in Plea Bargaining Decisions in Those With and Without Criminal Involvement: Tests of Theoretical Assumptions","authors":"Valerie F. Reyna, Krystia Reed, Alisha Meschkow, Vincent Calderon, Rebecca K. Helm","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70008","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>About 95% of criminal convictions in the United States are obtained through plea decisions, a growing global practice. Courts justify these convictions based on defendant choice—defendants, as rational agents, can freely choose to plead guilty or go to trial. However, a fundamental axiom of rational choice—descriptive invariance—has never been effectively tested for plea decisions. To test this axiom, we manipulated gain–loss framing of plea options. The shadow-of-trial model, the leading theory of plea decision-making, is predicated on expected utility theory which is in turn predicated on the invariance axiom; if the axiom is falsified, the entire structure collapses. Thus, framing effects are important as a test of fundamental assumptions undergirding practice and as an empirical phenomenon revealing effects of context. We tested framing effects in students and community members including those with criminal involvement for whom plea bargaining has personal relevance. Varying subtle changes in wording of outcomes, we produced pronounced differences in choices to accept a plea rather than proceed to trial. These framing effects were robust to age, sex, educational attainment, risk propensity (DOSPERT and sensation seeking), and loss aversion. Perceived fairness of the legal system increased acceptance and risk propensity decreased it (each about 32%). However, controlling for those effects, loss (compared to gain) framing increased the odds of going to trial by 664%. Criminal involvement did not account for additional variance. These results are consistent with prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory, but they challenge the legal theory of bargaining in “the shadow of trial.”</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143110728","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

Ratio Bias Across Cultures and Disciplines: How Academic Background Shapes Statistical Decision-Making 跨文化和学科的比例偏差：学术背景如何影响统计决策

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-01-28 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70010

Jochen Baumeister, Bernhard Streicher, Eva Lermer

引用次数: 0

Generous Returners, Vanishing Refunds: How Consumers Spend Monetary Refunds of Returns 慷慨的退货者，消失的退款：消费者如何消费退货的货币退款

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-01-28 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70009

Ata Jami

{"title":"Generous Returners, Vanishing Refunds: How Consumers Spend Monetary Refunds of Returns","authors":"Ata Jami","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70009","url":null,"abstract":"<p>For every $100 spent on retail industry, consumers on average return $14.50 value of products to retailers, and they receive the amount they originally paid as a refund. The refund money is fungible, and it can be freely spent on other items or be saved. This research examines consumers' propensity to spend return refunds and the types of products they purchase with return refunds. Across 10 studies (<i>N</i> = 2710), I show that people are more likely to make a purchase and to purchase hedonic products when they are spending return refunds versus money typically used for purchases. Examining the psychological mechanism underlying this effect, I show that consumers are more likely to spend return refunds because they perceive a lower psychological loss and experience less pain of paying when spending refund money than when spending other regularly available monetary sources. Hence, receiving return refunds has a stronger effect on the spending behavior of people who chronically experience an intense pain of paying (i.e., “tightwads”) than those who experience less pain (i.e., “spendthrifts”). Moreover, this research shows that neither payment depreciation nor the perception of a return refund as a windfall fully explain how people choose to spend it. In sum, individuals have a different psychological experience when they spend return refunds versus other conventional monetary sources.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.70009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143120018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Correction to The assessment of affective decision-making: Exploring alternative scoring methods for the Balloon Analog Risk Task and Columbia Card Task 对情感性决策评估的修正：探索气球模拟风险任务和哥伦比亚卡任务的替代评分方法

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70005

引用次数: 0

Determinants of Economic Risk Preferences Across Adolescence 青少年经济风险偏好的决定因素

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70007

Yubing Zhang, Colin F. Camerer, Sarah M. Tashjian

{"title":"Determinants of Economic Risk Preferences Across Adolescence","authors":"Yubing Zhang, Colin F. Camerer, Sarah M. Tashjian","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70007","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study examined economic risk preferences using a multidimensional approach in adolescents and young adults (<i>N =</i> 444, ages 13–27). Despite the two major theoretical approaches in adolescent economic risk-taking—socioemotional theories and fuzzy-trace theory—comparatively little is known about the role of incidental affective factors in economic risk-taking. We tested six demographic and psychological determinants (age, gender, positive/negative affect, state anxiety, and indecision) on two economic risk decision tasks (loss aversion and skewness). Adolescents reported higher positive affect and lower negative affect than adults, but anxiety and indecision were age-invariant. Women showed lower positive affect and higher negative affect, state anxiety, and indecision compared to men. We found women to be more loss-averse; all other factors were not related to loss aversion. Adolescents were equally likely to accept symmetric and skewed gambles, whereas adults had more nuanced preferences. Adolescents also demonstrated a reduced bias toward negatively skewed risks compared to young adults, but both groups showed similar preferences for positively skewed and symmetric risks. These results support fuzzy-trace theory's prediction of age-related shifts from verbatim to gist representations: More verbatim processing during adolescence facilitated risk-taking in negatively skewed risks, diverging from prospect theory. Positive affect shifted risk preference for adolescents and young adults in divergent directions—adolescents favored symmetrical risks more, while adults favored negatively skewed risks more. These patterns illustrate that adolescents and young adults in positive moods demonstrate risk preferences that are rare for their developmental stage, with potentially detrimental consequences depending on the choice at hand.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143115274","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

Blaming the Strawless Brickmaker: Constraint Neglect in Judging Decision Quality 指责没有稻草的砖匠：决策质量判断中的约束忽视

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2025-01-07 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70006

Xilin Li, Christopher K. Hsee

{"title":"Blaming the Strawless Brickmaker: Constraint Neglect in Judging Decision Quality","authors":"Xilin Li, Christopher K. Hsee","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70006","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>People often judge the quality of selection decisions made by others: The CEO of a firm may judge the quality of hiring decisions made by the firm's HR personnel; the readers of a journal may judge the quality of manuscript-acceptance decisions by the journal's editor. To accurately judge others' selection decision quality, evaluators should consider not only the outcome of the selection decisions but also the constraints of the decision-maker. For example, to judge the quality of the hiring decisions made by the HR personnel, the CEO should consider not only how many high-quality (vs. low-quality) candidates the HR personnel hired, but also how many high-quality (vs. low-quality) candidates applied, and how many candidates the HR personnel needed to hire. We theorize that evaluators tend to overlook these constraints, and, consequently, judge decision-makers who faced greater constraints as having made worse decisions than decisions-makers who faced lesser constraints, even if the former's decisions were actually as good as or better than the latter's. We refer to this phenomenon as Blaming the Strawless Brickmaker (from the saying “making bricks without straw”). Eight studies, employing mixed methods, demonstrate the Blaming-the-Strawless-Brickmaker effect, examine its underlying mechanism, and suggest ways to improve the quality of judged selection decision quality.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143113017","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

Noisy Retrieval of Experienced Probabilities Underlies Rational Judgment of Uncertain Multiple Events 经验概率的噪声检索是对不确定多事件进行理性判断的基础

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-12-23 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70002

Leonidas Spiliopoulos, Ralph Hertwig

{"title":"Noisy Retrieval of Experienced Probabilities Underlies Rational Judgment of Uncertain Multiple Events","authors":"Leonidas Spiliopoulos, Ralph Hertwig","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70002","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Learning the probabilities of multiple events from the environment is an important core competency of any organism. In our within-participant experiment, participants experienced samples from two distributions, or prospects, each comprised of two to four events, and were required to provide simultaneous, rather than sequential, judgment of the likelihood of the complete set of observed events. Empirical calibration curves that map experienced probabilities to subjective probabilities reveal that the degree of underextremity (overestimation of low likelihood events and underestimation of high likelihood events) is strongly conditional on the number of judged events. We uncover two regularities conditional on the number of events that modify (a) the crossover points of the calibration curves with the identity line and (b) the gradient or sensitivity of probability judgments. We present a process model of elicited (subjective) probabilities that captures these empirical regularities. Experienced events recalled from memory may be erroneously attributed to the wrong events based on the similarity of event outcomes. We conclude that the observed miscalibration of probability judgments can be attributed to the noisy retrieval component of a rational process-based decision model. We discuss the implications of our model for the conflicting empirical findings of overweighting and underweighting in the decisions from experience literature. Finally, we show that reliance on small samples can be an ecologically rational strategy for a bounded rational decision-maker (subject to noisy recall), as aggregated subjective probabilities are closer to the ecological probabilities than the experienced (or sampled) probabilities are.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.70002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143118283","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Cherry-Picking Tolerance About Untruthful News 对不真实新闻的选择性容忍

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-12-08 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70003

Xilin Li, Christopher K. Hsee, Shu Wang

{"title":"Cherry-Picking Tolerance About Untruthful News","authors":"Xilin Li, Christopher K. Hsee, Shu Wang","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70003","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>People are increasingly worried about untruthfulness in news reporting. We distinguish between two types of untruthfulness: apparent untruthfulness (containing false information) and consequential untruthfulness (giving readers a wrong impression of the truth). Consequential untruthfulness can be caused by both the presence of false information and cherry-picking (reporting only parts of the truth). Despite this, we find that people's perception of untruthfulness depends largely on apparent untruthfulness. Consequently, they treat news that cherry-picks information less negatively (e.g., less likely to criticize it and more likely to share it with others) than they treat news that contains false information, when the former is more consequentially untruthful than the latter. We dub this phenomenon as <i>cherry-picking tolerance</i>. We also find that prompting people to think about the consequence of the news report (i.e., the impressions people form after they read the news reports) will mitigate the cherry-picking tolerance. This research draws attention to the widespread practice of cherry-picking in news reporting and calls for a new look at what constitutes fake news.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142860254","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

Prescribing Agreement Improves Judgments and Decisions 处方协议可改进判决和决定

IF 1.8 3区心理学

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70004

Pavel V. Voinov, Günther Knoblich

{"title":"Prescribing Agreement Improves Judgments and Decisions","authors":"Pavel V. Voinov, Günther Knoblich","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70004","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We investigated whether prescribing agreement improves the quality of judgments and decisions. Participants were first asked to provide judgments or decisions individually. Then, they either revised their initial judgments and decisions based on a partners' response, or they provided a joint judgment agreed upon with their partner. In the latter condition, we allowed for a minimal communication protocol restricted to acceptance and rejection responses to each other's proposals. In the Agreement condition, participants improved both in a cognitive (Experiment 1a) and a perceptual decision task (Experiment 1b). The cognitive task agreement allowed participants to improve above the level of accuracy achieved with revision. Surprisingly, the prescribing agreement improved the quality of the initial independent decisions. In a judgment task (Experiment 2), the prescribing agreement led to more accurate judgments because partners weighed each other's judgments more equally than in the Revision condition where they gave higher weight to their own judgments. We conclude that prescribing agreement reduces egocentric discounting bias and motivates individuals to be more accurate. These results not only demonstrate that collective benefits in judgment and decision making can be accrued without verbal communication but also suggest potential limitations of this approach.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142737488","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