bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Charting the internal landscape: Affect associated with thoughts about major life domains explains life satisfaction
Authors: Miron-Shatz Talya , Diener Ed , Doniger Glen M. , Moore Tyler , Saphire-Bernstein Shimon 
Published: January 2023

AbstractStudies of happiness have examined the impact of demographics, personality and emotions accompanying daily activities on life satisfaction. We suggest that how people feel while contemplating aspects of their lives, including their weight, children and future prospects, is a promising yet uncharted territory within the internal landscape of life satisfaction. In a sample of 811 American women, we assessed women’s feelings when thinking about major life domains and frequency of thoughts about each domain. Regression and dominance analyses showed that emotional valence of thoughts about major life domains was an important predictor of current and prior life satisfaction, surpassing, in descending order, demographics, participants’ feelings during recent activities, and their neuroticism and extraversion scores. Domains thought about more frequently were often associated with greater emotional valence. These results suggest that life satisfaction may be improved by modifying emotional valence and frequency of thoughts about life domains. Moreover, these thoughts appear to be an important and relatively stable component of well-being worthy of further study.
Do Europeans like nudges?
Authors: Reisch Lucia A. , Sunstein Cass R. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractIn recent years, many governments have shown a keen interest in “nudges” — approaches to law and policy that maintain freedom of choice, but that steer people in certain directions. Yet to date, there has been little evidence on whether citizens of various societies support nudges and nudging. We report the results of nationally representative surveys in six European nations: Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and the United Kingdom. We find strong majority support for nudges of the sort that have been adopted, or under serious consideration, in democratic nations. Despite the general European consensus, we find markedly lower levels of support for nudges in two nations: Hungary and Denmark. We are not, in general, able to connect support for nudges with distinct party affiliations.
It’s personal: The effect of personal value on utilitarian moral judgments
Authors: Millar Charles , Starmans Christina , Fugelsang Jonathan , Friedman Ori 
Published: January 2023

AbstractWe investigated whether the personal importance of objects influences utilitarian decision-making in which damaging property is necessary to produce an overall positive outcome. In Experiment 1, participants judged saving five objects by destroying a sixth object to be less acceptable when the action required destroying the sixth object directly (rather than as a side-effect) and the objects were personally important (rather than unimportant). In Experiment 2, we demonstrated that utilitarian judgments were not influenced by the objects’ monetary worth. Together these findings suggest that personal importance underlies people’s sensitivity to damaging property as a means for utilitarian gains.
Enlarging the market yet decreasing the profit: An experimental study of competitive behavior when investment affects the prize
Authors: Hart Einav , Avrahami Judith , Kareev Yaakov 
Published: January 2023

AbstractIn many competitive situations, our investments increase our gains: Developing better products or research proposals may lead to higher contracts or patents or larger grants. Does increasing investment in such cases always guarantee higher gains? We used an experimental repeated competition game in which prizes depended on contestants’ investments (n=108). Contestants invested more when they increased the potential prize (“enlarge the market”), yet in some cases this tendency was counterproductive (“decrease the profit”): Contestants in fact diminished their earnings, compared to sitting out the competition and keeping their initial funds. Moreover, when a contestant’s investment decreased an opponent’s prize, the contestant tended to invest less; this effect, in turn, led to higher overall gains for both contestants. This result implies that prosocial considerations are at play. Notably, in certain situations, excessive competitive tendencies may lead to a larger waste of resources.
Reference dependence, cooperation, and coordination in games
Authors: Schneider Mark , Leland Jonathan W. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractThe problems of how self-interested players can cooperate despite incentives to defect, and how players can coordinate despite the presence of multiple equilibria, are among the oldest and most fundamental in game theory. In this report, we demonstrate that a plausible and even natural specification of the reference outcome in a game simultaneously predicts systematic cooperation and defection in the Prisoner’s Dilemma, as well as equilibrium selection and out-of-equilibrium play in coordination games. The predictions hold even if players are purely self-interested, there are no salient labels, the game is played only once, and there is no communication of any kind. Furthermore, the predictions are unique, as opposed to the multiplicity of equilibria in the infinitely repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma and in coordination games. We apply experimental results to test the predictions of the model.
From group diffusion to ratio bias: Effects of denominator and numerator salience on intuitive risk and likelihood judgments
Authors: Price Paul C. , Matthews Teri V. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractThe group-diffusion effect is the tendency for people to judge themselves to be less likely to experience a negative outcome as the total number of people exposed to the threat increases — even when the probability of the outcome is explicitly presented (Yamaguchi, 1998). In Experiment 1 we replicated this effect for two health threat scenarios using a variant of Yamaguchi’s original experimental paradigm. In Experiment 2, we showed that people also judge themselves to be less likely to be selected in a lottery as the number of people playing the lottery increases. In Experiment 3, we showed that explicitly presenting the number of people expected to be selected eliminates the group-diffusion effect, and in Experiment 4 we showed that presenting the number expected to be affected by a health threat without presenting the total number exposed to the threat produces a reverse effect. We propose, therefore, that the group-diffusion effect is related to the ratio bias. Both effects occur when people make risk or likelihood judgments based on information presented as a ratio. The difference is that the group-diffusion effect occurs when the denominator of the relevant ratio is more salient than the numerator, while the ratio bias occurs when the numerator is more salient than the denominator.
The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis
Authors: Monat Jamie P. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractWhen there are multiple competing objectives in a decision-making process, Multi-Attribute Choice scoring models are excellent tools, permitting the incorporation of both subjective and objective attributes. However, their accuracy depends upon the subjective techniques used to construct the attribute scales and their concomitant weights. Conventional techniques using local scales tend to overemphasize small differences in attribute measures, which may yield erroneous conclusions. The Range Sensitivity Principle (RSP) is often invoked to adjust attribute weights when local scales are used. In practice, however, decision makers often do not follow the prescriptions of the Range Sensitivity Principle and under-adjust the weights, resulting in potentially poor decisions. Examples are discussed as is a proposed solution: the use of global scales instead of local scales.
Editorial: Methodology in judgment and decision making research
Authors: Glöckner Andreas , Hilbig Benjamin E. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractIn this introduction to the special issue on methodology, we provide background on its original motivation and a systematic overview of the contributions. The latter are discussed with correspondence to the phase of the scientific process they (most strongly) refer to: Theory construction, design, data analysis, and cumulative development of scientific knowledge. Several contributions propose novel measurement techniques and paradigms that will allow for new insights and can thus avail researchers in JDM and beyond. Another set of contributions centers around how models can best be tested and/or compared. Especially when viewed in combination, the papers on this topic spell out vital necessities for model comparisons and provide approaches that solve noteworthy problems prior work has been faced with.
Herbert Simon’s spell on judgment and decision making
Authors: Katsikopoulos Konstantinos V. , Lan Cherng-Horng (Dan) 
Published: January 2023

AbstractHow many judgment and decision making (JDM) researchers have not claimed to be building on Herbert Simon’s work? We identify two of Simon’s goals for JDM research: He sought to understand people’s decision processes—the descriptive goal—and studied whether thesameprocesses lead to good decisions—the prescriptive goal. To investigate how recent JDM research relates to these goals, we analyzed the articles published in theJournal of Behavioral Decision Makingand inJudgment and Decision Makingfrom 2006 to 2010. Out of 377 articles, 91 cite Simon or we judged them as directly relating to his goals. We asked whether these articles areintegrative, in the following sense: For a descriptive article we asked if it contributes to building a theory thatreconcilesdifferent conceptualizations of cognition such as neural networks and heuristics. For a prescriptive article we asked if it contributes to building a method thatcombinesideas of other methods such as heuristics and optimization models. Based on our subjective judgments we found that the proportion of integrative articles was 67% of the prescriptive and 52% of the descriptive articles. We offer suggestions for achieving more integration of JDM theories. The article concludes with the thesis that although JDM researchers work under Simon’s spell, no one really knows what that spell is.
Diagnostic Task Selection for Strategy Classification in Judgment and Decision Making: Theory, Validation, and Implementation in R
Authors: Jekel Marc , Fiedler Susann , Glöckner Andreas 
Published: January 2023

AbstractOne major statistical and methodological challenge in Judgment and Decision Making research is the reliable identification of individual decision strategies by selection of diagnostic tasks, that is, tasks for which predictions of the strategies differ sufficiently. The more strategies are considered, and the larger the number of dependent measures simultaneously taken into account in strategy classification (e.g., choices, decision time, confidence ratings; Glöckner, 2009), the more complex the selection of the most diagnostic tasks becomes. We suggest the Euclidian Diagnostic Task Selection (EDTS) method as a standardized solution for the problem. According to EDTS, experimental tasks are selected that maximize the average difference between strategy predictions for any multidimensional prediction space. In a comprehensive model recovery simulation, we evaluate and quantify the influence of diagnostic task selection on identification rates in strategy classification. Strategy classification with EDTS shows superior performance in comparison to less diagnostic task selection algorithms such as representative sampling. The advantage of EDTS is particularly large if only few dependent measures are considered. We also provide an easy-to-use function in the free software package R that allows generating predictions for the most commonly considered strategies for a specified set of tasks and evaluating the diagnosticity of those tasks via EDTS; thus, to apply EDTS, no prior programming knowledge is necessary.
Methodological notes on model comparisons and strategy classification: A falsificationist proposition
Authors: Moshagen Morten , Hilbig Benjamin E. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractTaking a falsificationist perspective, the present paper identifies two major shortcomings of existing approaches to comparative model evaluations in general and strategy classifications in particular. These are (1) failure to consider systematic error and (2) neglect of global model fit. Using adherence measures to evaluate competing models implicitly makes the unrealistic assumption that the error associated with the model predictions is entirely random. By means of simple schematic examples, we show that failure to discriminate between systematic and random error seriously undermines this approach to model evaluation. Second, approaches that treat random versus systematic error appropriately usually rely on relative model fit to infer which model or strategy most likely generated the data. However, the model comparatively yielding the best fit may still be invalid. We demonstrate that taking for granted the vital requirement that a model by itself should adequately describe the data can easily lead to flawed conclusions. Thus, prior to considering the relative discrepancy of competing models, it is necessary to assess their absolute fit and thus, again, attempt falsification. Finally, the scientific value of model fit is discussed from a broader perspective.
What might judgment and decision making research be like if we took a Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing?
Authors: Matthews William J. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractJudgment and decision making research overwhelmingly uses null hypothesis significance testing as the basis for statistical inference. This article examines an alternative, Bayesian approach which emphasizes the choice between two competing hypotheses and quantifies the balance of evidence provided by the data—one consequence of which is that experimental results may be taken to strongly favour the null hypothesis. We apply a recently-developed “Bayesiant-test” to existing studies of the anchoring effect in judgment, and examine how the change in approach affects both the tone of hypothesis testing and the substantive conclusions that one draws. We compare the Bayesian approach with Fisherian and Neyman-Pearson testing, examining its relationship to conventionalp-values, the influence of effect size, and the importance of prior beliefs about the likely state of nature. The results give a sense of how Bayesian hypothesis testing might be applied to judgment and decision making research, and of both the advantages and challenges that a shift to this approach would entail.
Simple eye movement metrics can predict future decision making performance: The case of financial choices
Authors: Król Michał , Król Magdalena Ewa 
Published: January 2023

AbstractDecisions are often delegated to experts chosen based on their past performance record which may be subject to noise. For instance, a person with little skill could still make a lucky decision that proves correct ex-post, while a skilled expert could make the best possible use of available information to reach a decision that, with hindsight, turns out incorrect. We aimed to show that one could assess decision skills more accurately when analyzing not only the observed decisions, but also the decision-making process. Incorporating eye-tracking into an established behavioral finance experimental framework, we found that making an eye transition between pieces of information that previous research associated with bias makes one less likely to make good financial decisions in future trials. Thus, even the simplest, easy to obtain eye metrics could allow us to more accurately judge if a person’s performance is a reflection of skill, or down to luck and unlikely to be reproduced in the future.
An exploratory investigation of the impact of evaluation context on ambiguity aversion
Authors: Güney Şule , Newell Ben R. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractThis paper explores how context influences the evaluation of risky and ambiguous bets in the classic two-colour Ellsberg task. In three experiments context was manipulated via the presence/absence of additional bets against which the risky and ambiguous bets could be compared. In Experiment 1, three bets were added that were ‘intermediate’ in the sense that the information they yielded regarding the proportion of coloured balls lay between that provided by the risky and ambiguous bets. The presence of these intermediate bets reduced the price gap between the risky and ambiguous bets – and hence ambiguity aversion – by reducing the pricing of the risky bet relative to a condition in which only the risky and ambiguous bets were presented. In Experiment 2, we examined the individual effect of each of those intermediate bets on the valuations and found that the specific type of additional bet did not significantly affect the extent of the respective price gap. Finally, in Experiment 3, we explored the impact of the presence of ‘filler’ bets that were not necessarily in between the risky and ambiguous bets in terms of the information they yield. We found that having these filler bets also reduced ambiguity aversion. Overall, the findings suggest that the presence of additional bet(s) changes people’s valuations, and narrows the well-documented gap between the risky and ambiguous bets of the Ellsberg task, regardless of whether these additional bet(s) yield relatively more or less information.
From foe to friend and back again: The temporal dynamics of intra-party bias in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
Authors: Dunham Yarrow , Arechar Antonio A. , Rand David G. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractPolitical identification is the basis of enduring conflict, suggesting that political attitudes are difficult to change. Here we show that in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, political identities underwent modification in response to salient political events. We investigate these dynamics in detail by collecting data at periodic intervals from mid-June 2016 through the general election (N = 3,958). We operationalize identification using prosocial giving in Dictator Games played between supporters of competing primary candidates recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk. The observed dynamics differed across political parties. In-group bias among Democrats remained high until the Democratic National Convention, disappeared shortly thereafter, and then returned during the final stage of the election. Bias among Republicans was generally high until the final days of the election. The late resurgence of bias among Democrats was not reflected in voting intentions, but may have presaged the Democratic election loss.
Communicating clinical trial outcomes: Effects of presentation method on physicians’ evaluations of new treatments
Authors: Marcatto Francesco , Rolison Jonathan J. , Ferrante Donatella 
Published: January 2023

AbstractPhysicians expect a treatment to be more effective when its clinical outcomes are described as relative rather than as absolute risk reductions. We examined whether effects of presentation method (relative vs. absolute risk reduction) remain when physicians are provided the baseline risk information, a vital piece of statistical information omitted in previous studies. Using a between-subjects design, ninety five physicians were presented the risk reduction associated with a fictitious treatment for hypertension either as an absolute risk reduction or as a relative risk reduction, with or without including baseline risk information. Physicians reported that the treatment would be more effective and that they would be more willing to prescribe it when its risk reduction was presented to them in relative rather than in absolute terms. The relative risk reduction was perceived as more effective than absolute risk reduction even when the baseline risk information was explicitly reported. We recommend that information about absolute risk reduction be made available to physicians in the reporting of clinical outcomes. Moreover, health professionals should be cognizant of the potential biasing effects of risk information presented in relative risk terms.
A direct and comprehensive test of two postulates of politeness theory applied to uncertainty communication
Authors: Sirota Miroslav , Juanchich Marie 
Published: January 2023

AbstractApplied to uncertainty communication, politeness theory postulates that when announcing bad news (1) speakers may intend not only to inform, but also to manage (e.g., save) the hearers’ or speakers’ own faces (i.e., face-managing intentions), and (2) speakers may perform face-managing intentions by altering the explicitly communicated probability. Previous research has assumed these two core postulates when explaining various reasoning and judgment phenomena in hearers, but has failed to test them empirically in a comprehensive and direct way: jointly in relation to speakers. To provide this critical evidence, we asked subjects to communicate a predefined numerical probability of two negative outcomes, using a verbal probability scale. Subjects reported their communication intentions afterwards. In line with the first politeness theory postulate, speakers intended not only to be informative but also to tactfully announce bad news or to avoid being blamed in case they made inaccurate (too low or too high) prediction. In line with the second politeness theory postulate, speakers altered their explicitly communicated probability more often and more substantially when adopting face-managing intentions than when adopting informative intentions. We discuss how this evidence corroborates the politeness theory and validates the previous research that focused on hearers.
Judging competing theoretical accounts by their empirical content and parsimony: Reply to Myrseth and Wollbrant (2015)
Authors: Kieslich Pascal J. , Hilbig Benjamin E. 
Published: January 2023

AbstractMyrseth and Wollbrant (2015) offer an alternative theoretical explanation for our finding that defection entails more cognitive conflict than cooperation (Kieslich & Hilbig, 2014). Although we completely agree that different theoretical explanations for a result are possible, we maintain that the theoretical approach we tested (Rand et al., 2014) is parsimonious and falsifiable, excluding certain plausible results a priori. By comparison, the alternative framework proposed by Myrseth and Wollbrant requires several debatable assumptions to account for our findings, rendering it the more complex theory. Besides, their framework as a whole could have accounted for any possible finding in our experiment, making it impossible to falsify it with our data. We thus conclude that the notion by Rand et al.—that there is a spontaneous disposition to cooperate—has more empirical content while requiring fewer assumptions.