×

Models of emerging contexts in risky and complex decision settings. (English) Zbl 1109.90317

Summary: Key components of the multiple constraint satisfaction framework are explored in a series of experiments set in complex and ambiguous domains. All cases show the prevalence and importance of a purposeful structuring of the information by the participants. The participants gradually generate coherence, even in cases without increasing information. In accordance with multiple constraint satisfaction predictions, the assessments of inferences increasingly spread apart. Also, the correlations between the dependent variable (the decision) and the independent variables, as well as between the independent variables, consistently grow stronger as the participants progress through the decision stages. The information structuring–a gradual simplification of the component structure–is captured as principal components associated with the various decision stages. Neural networks predict the judgments in the various decision stages relatively well. Finally, the role of the ongoing structuring of the underlying information was explored through the application of trained networks to data in other decision stages.

MSC:

90B50 Management decision making, including multiple objectives
91B30 Risk theory, insurance (MSC2010)
PDFBibTeX XMLCite
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Brézillon, P.; Pasquier, L.; Pomerol, J.-C., Reasoning with contextual graphs, European Journal of Operational Research, 136, 290-298 (2002) · Zbl 1091.68598
[2] Davies, E. B.; Ashton, R. A., Threshold adjustment in response to asymmetric loss functions: The case of auditors’ “substantial doubt” thresholds, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 1082-1099 (2002)
[3] Flynn, K.; Bagli, C. V., A woman’s disappearance still baffles after 18 years, The New York Times, March 6, A21 (2001)
[4] (Hastie, R., Inside the Juror: The Psychology of Juror Decision Making (1993), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge University Press New York)
[5] Holyoak, K. J.; Simon, D., Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 3-31 (1999)
[6] Holyoak, K. J.; Thagard, P., The analogical mind, American Psychologist, 52, 35-44 (1997)
[7] Lowe, D. J.; Recker, P. M.J., The effect of hindsight bias on jurors’ evaluations of auditor decisions, Decision Sciences, 25, 401-426 (1994)
[8] Lundberg, C. G., Made sense and remembered sense—Sensemaking through abduction, The Journal of Economic Psychology, 21, 691-709 (2000)
[9] Lundberg, C. G., Modeling and predicting emerging inference-based decisions in complex and ambiguous legal settings, European Journal of Operational Research, 153, 417-432 (2004) · Zbl 1053.90070
[10] Lundberg, C. G.; Nagle, B. M., Post-decision inference editing of supportive and counterindicative signals among external auditors in a going concern judgment, European Journal of Operational Research, 136, 264-281 (2002) · Zbl 1091.91527
[11] Philips, F., The distortion of criteria after decision-making, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 769-784 (2003)
[12] Pomerol, J.-C.; Adam, F., Decision making biases and context, Journal of Decision Systems, 12 (2003)
[13] (Read, S. J.; Miller, L. C., Connectivist Models of Social Reasoning and Social Behavior (1998), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Mahwah, NJ)
[14] Sá, W. C.; West, R. F.; Stanowich, K. E., The domain specificity and generality of belief bias: Searching for a generalizable critical thinking skill, Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 497-510 (1999)
[15] T.R. Shultz, J.A. Katz, M.R. Lepper, Clinging to beliefs: A constraint-satisfaction model, Poster, in: 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2001. Available from <http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/cogsci2001/poster-2.html; T.R. Shultz, J.A. Katz, M.R. Lepper, Clinging to beliefs: A constraint-satisfaction model, Poster, in: 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2001. Available from <http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/cogsci2001/poster-2.html
[16] Svenson, O., Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre-and post-decision processes, Acta Psychologica, 80, 143-168 (1992)
[17] Svenson, O., Differentiation and consolidation theory: Decision making processes before and after choice, (Juslin, P.; Montgomery, H., Judgment and Decision Making—Neo-Brunswikian and Process-tracing Approaches (1999), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates London), 175-198
[18] Thagard, P., Coherence in Thought and Action (2001), The MIT Press: The MIT Press Cambridge, MA
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.