{"title":"认知偏差任务中的鼠标光标运动揭示了潜在的加工差异","authors":"Jinjin Wu, George D. Farmer, Paul A. Warren","doi":"10.1002/bdm.70025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Biases are prevalent in human judgment and decision-making (JDM). Previous research has suggested that some biases might share common underlying causes and can be accounted for under dual-process theories in which fast and error-prone System 1 drives erroneous behavior. Here, we use an online paradigm to investigate similarities and differences in behavior across three commonly studied cognitive bias phenomena: cognitive reflection test (CRT), gambler's fallacy (GF), and conjunction fallacy (CF). These are all thought to emerge during biased System 1 processing. Critically, we examine both summative performance metrics and process tracing measures derived from mouse cursor movements and growth curve analysis (GCA). Summative performance in these tasks was broadly in line with previous studies, and we replicated correlations in accuracy between tasks (CRT vs. CF and CRT vs. GF). However, we found key differences in our GCA of mouse trajectories. Specifically, in the CRT and the CF tasks, participants tended to choose the incorrect option more quickly relative to the correct option, as might be expected. However, the opposite tendency was observed for GF—people tended to take longer to choose the wrong answer. We also found evidence from the mouse movement analyses for between-task differences in the extent to which participants were tempted by the option they did not choose. These findings challenge prominent dual-process accounts of JDM and highlight the potential of process tracing (and in particular mouse movement analyses) for revealing insights into cognitive processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"38 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.70025","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mouse Cursor Movements in Cognitive Bias Tasks Reveal Underlying Processing Differences\",\"authors\":\"Jinjin Wu, George D. Farmer, Paul A. Warren\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bdm.70025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Biases are prevalent in human judgment and decision-making (JDM). Previous research has suggested that some biases might share common underlying causes and can be accounted for under dual-process theories in which fast and error-prone System 1 drives erroneous behavior. Here, we use an online paradigm to investigate similarities and differences in behavior across three commonly studied cognitive bias phenomena: cognitive reflection test (CRT), gambler's fallacy (GF), and conjunction fallacy (CF). These are all thought to emerge during biased System 1 processing. Critically, we examine both summative performance metrics and process tracing measures derived from mouse cursor movements and growth curve analysis (GCA). Summative performance in these tasks was broadly in line with previous studies, and we replicated correlations in accuracy between tasks (CRT vs. CF and CRT vs. GF). However, we found key differences in our GCA of mouse trajectories. Specifically, in the CRT and the CF tasks, participants tended to choose the incorrect option more quickly relative to the correct option, as might be expected. However, the opposite tendency was observed for GF—people tended to take longer to choose the wrong answer. We also found evidence from the mouse movement analyses for between-task differences in the extent to which participants were tempted by the option they did not choose. These findings challenge prominent dual-process accounts of JDM and highlight the potential of process tracing (and in particular mouse movement analyses) for revealing insights into cognitive processes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"38 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.70025\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.70025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.70025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
Biases are prevalent in human judgment and decision-making (JDM). Previous research has suggested that some biases might share common underlying causes and can be accounted for under dual-process theories in which fast and error-prone System 1 drives erroneous behavior. Here, we use an online paradigm to investigate similarities and differences in behavior across three commonly studied cognitive bias phenomena: cognitive reflection test (CRT), gambler's fallacy (GF), and conjunction fallacy (CF). These are all thought to emerge during biased System 1 processing. Critically, we examine both summative performance metrics and process tracing measures derived from mouse cursor movements and growth curve analysis (GCA). Summative performance in these tasks was broadly in line with previous studies, and we replicated correlations in accuracy between tasks (CRT vs. CF and CRT vs. GF). However, we found key differences in our GCA of mouse trajectories. Specifically, in the CRT and the CF tasks, participants tended to choose the incorrect option more quickly relative to the correct option, as might be expected. However, the opposite tendency was observed for GF—people tended to take longer to choose the wrong answer. We also found evidence from the mouse movement analyses for between-task differences in the extent to which participants were tempted by the option they did not choose. These findings challenge prominent dual-process accounts of JDM and highlight the potential of process tracing (and in particular mouse movement analyses) for revealing insights into cognitive processes.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.