"Intuitive" and "deliberate" processes in decision making from memory
Final Report Abstract
The reported research aimed at clarifying the relations between cognitive processes that are typically seen as "deliberative" or "intuitive". In one branch of the project, exemplar-based and rule-based processes in judgment were conceptualized as concurrent rather than exclusive pocesses the impact of which may vary across tasks. A measurement model for assessing the relative impact of the respective processes was developed and validated in a first set of experiments. Simulation studies for parameter recovery and flexibility were added to the empirical studies. Subsequently, the model was used to investigate (a) the joint impact of cue format and presentation mode and (b) the learning trajectories across multiple trials. A second branch sought to clarify conflicting conclusions drawn in the realm of memory-based decision making where Glöckner and Hodges (2001) reported a high prevalence of compensatory processes according to a parallel constraint satisfaction (PCS) model whereas former work had observed a preponderance of noncompensatory heuristics. In three experiments, procedural differences between the lines of work were contrasted directly to locate the source of the differences. Unfortunately, no strategy differences whatsoever were observed between the conditions, leaving the initial question unanswered. In a final line of experiments, we sought to test an alternative unifying account of the so-called "unconscious thought effect" (Dijksterhuis, 2004) by experimentally testing moderators of the effect. However, the effect itself was elusive. Although it was demonstrated in one study, a second study with even higher statistical power using the same materials did not replicate the effect. This adds to recent meta-analytic results questioning its existence in the first place. All data have been archived and made publicly available on the OpenScience Framework platform.
Publications
- (2017). Measuring the relative contributions of rule-based and exemplar-based processes in judgment: Validation of a simple model. Judgment and Decision Making, 12(5), 491-506
Bröder, A., Gräf, M., & Kieslich, P. J.
- (2017). Urteilen und Entscheiden (3. Auflage). In J. Müsseler & M. Rieger (Eds.), Allgemeine Psychologie (pp. 619-659). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer
Bröder, A., & Hilbig, B. E.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53898-8_17)
