An hypothesis generation model for judgment in nonmetric multiple-cue probability learning

The purpose of this paper is to present a two-phase hypothesis generation model to describe behavior in multiple-cue probability learning tasks with nonmetric cues. The model assumes that on each trial the subject generates two sets of hypotheses: (a) a hypothesis concerning which cue dimension (or pattern) will lead to a correct prediction on that trial and (b) a hypothesis concerning which response will be correct given the cue dimension attended to on that trial.Five-hundred-twelve subjects were assigned to 20 groups in a binary choice task involving two binary cue dimensions. Each group observed cues which differed in validity. Analysis of the data indicated that subjects attend to both cue dimensions in making judgments even when one cue has zero validity. A test of the fit of the observed data to the asymptotic response proportions predicted by the model indicated a reasonable fit.     

Subjective confidence in perceptual judgments: a test of the self-consistency model

Two questions about subjective confidence in perceptual judgments are examined: the bases for these judgments and the reasons for their accuracy. Confidence in perceptual judgments has been claimed to rest on qualitatively different processes than confidence in memory tasks. However, predictions from a self-consistency model (SCM), which had been confirmed for general-information questions (Koriat, 2010) and social attitudes (Koriat & Adiv, 2010), are shown to hold true also for perceptual judgments. In SCM, confidence is modeled by the procedure for assessment of statistical level of confidence: For a 2-alternative, forced-choice item, confidence is based on the consistency with which the choice is favored across a sample of representations of the item, and acts as a monitor of the likelihood that a new sample will yield the same choice. Assuming that these representations are drawn from commonly shared populations of representations associated with each item, predictions regarding the basis of confidence were confirmed by results concerning the functions relating confidence and choice latency to interparticipant consensus and to intraparticipant consistency for majority and minority choices. With regard to the confidence-accuracy (C/A) relationship, the consensuality principle, documented for general-knowledge tasks (Koriat, 2008a), was replicated for perceptual judgments: Confidence correlated with the consensuality of the choice rather than with its correctness, suggesting that the C/A correlation is due to the relationship between confidence and self-consistency and is positive only as long as the correct choices are the consistently made choices. SCM provides a general model for the basis and accuracy of confidence judgments across different domains.     

情感启发式对风险选择的影响

本研究旨在考察情感启发式对风险选择的影响。研究1采用线上和线下结合的方式对687名大学生进行问卷施测,修订并检验中文版情感启发式问卷的信效度,以该问卷测试的风险−收益相关系数作为衡量情感启发式倾向的指标。研究2采用极端被试法,在103名大学生完成问卷后,将风险−收益相关系数绝对值前20%和后20%的被试分为高、低情感启发式组,完成风险选择任务。结果发现：（1）中文版情感启发式问卷具有较好的信度与效度,可以作为情感启发式倾向的测试问卷。（2）风险选择任务激活负性情绪时,相比于低情感启发式倾向,高情感启发式倾向的被试更容易受负性情绪的影响,其风险判断的主观值更高。研究揭示了情感启发式对风险选择的影响,为情感启发式作为个体进行风险判断的重要依据提供了实证支持。     

Outcome Feedback Effects on Under- and Overconfident Judgments (General Knowledge Tasks)

Effects of outcome feedback on overconfident and underconfident judgments were investigated. It was hypothesized that outcome feedback had a twofold effect on confidence judgments, corrective and confidence increasing, the latter effect operating only when the items to be judged are related and/or nonindependent. The proposed hypothesis implies two predictions which were tested in two experiments: (1) If the items are nonindependent and related, outcome feedback will reduce bias and improve calibration of underconfident judgments; by contrast, the feedback will neither reduce bias nor improve calibration in the case of overconfident judgments. (2) If, on the other hand, the items are independent and unrelated, outcome feedback will reduce underconfidence as well as overconfidence bias and improve calibration in both cases. The obtained results provided strong support for the first prediction, while the second prediction was not supported. Although the differences between with- and without-feedback groups on the dependent variables were in the expected direction, they were nonsignificant.     

“过分自信”的研究及其跨文化差异

“过分自信”是一种偏离校准,是指人们关于一般知识问题的概率判断通常以某种方式偏离校准,这种偏离都偏高。跨文化系列研究表明：面对常识和概率判断问题,集体主义文化成员（如中国人）比个体主义文化成员（如美国人）更过分自信。文章在简要回顾“过分自信”研究的基础上,对“过分自信”的跨文化差异及原因进行了比较详细地介绍,并对“过分自信”跨文化差异研究的进一步发展和实际应用进行讨论。冀对以往的研究做初步的归纳和总结,促进决策领域中跨文化比较方面的研究得到进一步发展     

Hierarchical modeling of paired comparison data

The method of paired comparisons belongs to a small group of techniques that provide explicit information about the consistency of individual and aggregated choices. This article investigates the link between the individual- and group-level judgments by extending R. D. Luce's (1959) model, which was originally developed for individual choice behavior, to a mixed-effects paired comparison model. It is shown that standard multilevel software for binary data can be used to estimate the model. The interpretation of the paired comparison parameters and statistical model tests are discussed in detail. An extensive analysis of an experimental study illustrates the usefulness of a hierarchical approach in modeling multiple pairwise judgments.     

选择、自我表达与选择扩散效应

自我表达会影响西方人的态度, 产生选择扩散效应。国外相关的跨文化研究发现东方人不存在该效应。通过4个实验研究中国文化下自我表达对选择态度的影响, 发现选择方式(主动、被动)和自我表达形式(直接、间接)对选择态度产生影响。无论是自己的主动选择还是强加的被动选择, 直接的自我表达会增加对所获对象的喜爱程度, 表现为对获得性的肯定。研究者认为, 两种选择方式下不同的心理加工过程导致了这种获得性：直接表达使个人态度暴露在外, 进行主动选择时要对他人的给予做出肯定回应; 而进行被动选择时, 人们要减缓因利益受损可能导致的失调, 同时中国文化下的面子策略也使人们增加对所获对象的喜爱程度。不过, 间接的自我表达对选择态度的影响不明显。研究者认为, 多个影响因素的相互消长使选择态度得以维持。     

Analyzing the accuracy of probability judgments for multiple events: An extension of the covariance decomposition

The probability score (PS) can be used to measure the overall accuracy of probability judgments for a single event, e.g., “Rain falls,” or “This patient has cancer.” It has been shown previously how a “covariance decomposition” of the mean of PS over many occasions indexes several distinct aspects of judgment performance (J. F. Yates, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 132–156 (1982)). There are many situations in which probability judgments are reported for sample space partitions containing more than one event and its complement, e.g., medical situations in which a patient might suffer from Disease X, Disease Y, or Disease Z, or testing situations in which the correct answer to an item might be any one of alternatives (a) through (e). The probability score for multiple events (PSM) serves as a measure of the overall accuracy of probability judgments for the events in partitions of any size. The present article describes and interprets an extension of the covariance decomposition to the mean of PSM. The decomposition is illustrated with data from two contexts, medicine and education.     

Perceptions of Women Condom Proposers Among Chinese Americans,Japanese Americans,and European Americans1

This study was a comparison of the judgments made about a sexually active female condom proposer by men and women of 3 ethnic groups: Chinese Americans, European Americans, and Japanese Americans. Results indicate that Chinese Americans reacted more negatively to the female condom proposer than did European Americans. Japanese Americans could not be distinguished between either of the groups on most measures. However, Japanese Americans did perceive the female condom proposer to be less sexually attractive than did the other 2 groups. These findings underscore the importance of distinguishing among subgroups of Asian Americans, especially when considering issues related to gender and sexuality.     

Adding information may increase overconfidence in accuracy of knowledge retrieval

Feelings of retrospective confidence concerning the accuracy of a chosen answer might rely, among other things, on the amount of available information, regardless of its correctness. 43 participants, 26 women and 17 men (M age = 23.4 yr., SD = 3.5) in an intact group design, answered nine easy and nine difficult binary forced-choice questions and rated their confidence regarding the correctness of their choices. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups, differing in the additional information provided regarding the questions: a control group provided with no additional information, a correct information group, and a misleading information group. Performance was worst in the misleading information group, yet no difference in confidence was found between the correct and misleading information groups. The findings were interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that feelings of confidence partly reflect peripheral factors, indirectly related to choice processes.     

Relation of Maternal Role Concepts to Parenting, Employment Choices, and Life Satisfaction Among Japanese Women

Japanese women are often described as heavily invested in the role of mother, yet young women in contemporary Japan are increasingly likely to postpone or opt out of marriage and child rearing. To understand the psychological dynamics of parenting among Japanese women who have chosen to become mothers, we examined the relation of maternal role salience beliefs, personal maternal role commitment, and parenting self-efficacy to life satisfaction, number of children, and employment status. Survey data were obtained from 116 urban Japanese women with children in the 2nd grade. Mothers with more children expressed greater personal role commitment. Those who had sought employment were less likely to hold strong maternal role salience beliefs. Life satisfaction was predicted by having more children, feeling efficacious as a parent, and being employed. These findings suggest that even in a society characterized by strong normative expectations for women, women's life satisfaction and choices about family life and employment are related to individual beliefs, attitudes, and judgments about their role.     

Domain familiarity as a cue for judgments of learning

Students differ in how much they already know about topics within and across their courses. Few studies, however, have examined the relationship between participants’ levels of knowledge across topics (i.e., their “domain familiarity”) and their learning of information from those topics, their study choices related to those topics, and their subjective self-assessments of their learning about the topics. As such, in two studies we had participants (Study 1, college students; Study 2, Mturk workers) rank their domain familiarity for several to-be-studied domains (e.g., chemistry, history), rate their efficacy and interest in those domains, study and make judgments of learning (JOLs) for facts from each domain, and finally complete a short-answer test over those facts. Participants’ efficacy and interest ratings for the topics were linearly related to their topic rankings, as were their recall of and JOLs for facts from those domains. Although the JOLs were consistently overconfident, they were more overconfident for better-known than for lesser-known topics. Participants’ study times were not related to their topic rankings (Studies 1 and 2), but participants did use domain familiarity to strategically decide which domains to restudy before the test (Study 2). Participants typically chose to restudy their least-familiar topics, but chose to restudy their best-known topic under extremely limited restudy conditions. As a whole, the results suggest that participants effectively use their domain familiarity as a basis for their JOLs and restudy choices, but to some extent overuse this factor to assess their learning, and underuse it to guide initial study.     

Peer Input and Revised Judgment: Exploring the Effects of (Un) Biased Confidence1

An experiment was conducted to test the effects of biased versus unbiased peer input on the revised judgments of others. After completing a set of knowledge items and assessing their confidence in each answer, subjects were: (a) given written input (in the form of answers and confidence assessments) from a peer who had completed the same set of items, and (b) allowed to revise their earlier answers and confidence assessments. Peer input was either overconfident, underconfident, or appropriately confident. Relative to appropriately confident input, both overconfident and underconfident input caused subjects’ accuracy in judgment to suffer. Overconfident input was particularly harmful because it led to more extreme overconfidence without any increase in accuracy. Practical implications of these results are discussed.     

Maximizing,choice freedom,and duration judgments in choice making

This paper examines (a) whether people are less accurate in judging choice time as choice tasks involve more choice options, more choice information, or a combination of both and (b) whether people with a higher tendency to look for the best option in choice making (maximizers) have less accurate duration judgments of choice time as compared to people who are more easily settling for a choice outcome that is satisfactory (satisficers). A multilevel analysis is used to explore the relationships of interest using data collected through a series of choice tasks. In general, the results suggest that people seem to misjudge time durations when making choices. Moreover, empirical evidence demonstrates that people with an outspoken tendency to maximize in choice making do not differ significantly in estimating choice time accurately as compared to people who experience almost no need to maximize.     

Cultural differences in the primacy effect for person perception

Previous work has shown there are robust differences in how North Americans and East Asians form impressions of people. The present research examines whether the tendency to weigh initial information more heavily—the primacy effect—may be another component of these cultural differences. Specifically, we tested whether Americans would be more likely to use first impressions to guide person perception, compared to Japanese participants. In this experiment, participants read a vignette that described a target person's behaviour, then rated the target's personality. Before reading the vignette, some trait information was given to create an expectation about the target's personality. The data revealed that Americans used this initial information to guide their judgments of the target, whereas the Japanese sample based their judgments on all the information more evenly. Thus, Americans showed a stronger primacy effect in their impression formation than Japanese participants, who engaged in more data‐driven processing.     

Intertemporal Similarity: Discounting as a Last Resort

Standard models of intertemporal choice assume that individuals discount future payoffs by integrating reward amounts and time delays to generate a discounted value. Alternative models propose that, rather than integrate across them, individuals compare within attributes (amounts and delays) to determine if differences in one attribute outweigh differences in another attribute. For instance, the similarity model 1) compares the two reward amounts to determine whether they are similar, 2) compares the similarity of the two time delays, and then 3) makes a decision based on these similarity judgments. Here, I tested discounting models against attribute‐based models that use similarity judgments to make choices. I collected intertemporal choices and similarity judgments for the reward amounts and time delays from participants in three experiments. All experiments tested the ability of discounting and similarity models to predict intertemporal choices. Model generalization analyses showed that the best predicting models started with similarity judgments and then, if similarity failed to make a prediction, resorted to discounting models. Similarity judgments also matched intertemporal choice data demonstrating both the magnitude and sign effects, thereby accounting for behavioral data that contradict many discounting models. These results highlight the possibility that attribute‐based models such as the similarity models provide alternatives to discounting that may offer insights into the process of making intertemporal choices. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Does mood influence the realism of confidence judgments?

Previous research has shown that mood affects cognition, but the extent to which mood affects meta-cognitive judgments is a relatively over-looked issue. In the current study we investigated how mood influences the degree of realism in participants' confidence judgments (based on an episodic memory task). Using music and film in combination, we successfully induced an elated mood in half of the participants, but failed to induce a sad mood in the other half. In line with previous research, the participants in both conditions were overconfident in their judgments. However, and contrary to our prediction, our data indicated that there was no difference in the realism of the confidence between the conditions. When relating this result to previous research, our conclusion is that there is no, or very little, influence of mood of moderate intensity on the realism of confidence judgments.     

Basis of metamemory judgments for text with multiple‐choice,essay and recall tests

Accuracy of metamemory for text was compared for multiple‐choice, essay and recall tests. Essay and recall tests were scored with Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), number of correct idea units and number of word matches. Each measure was correlated with college students' predictions and posttest confidence judgments across texts to determine metamemory accuracy. Metamemory accuracy varied for different types of tests with multiple‐choice tests generally producing greater accuracy than essay tests. However, metamemory accuracy for essay and recall tests depended on the measure used to score them. Number of correct idea units produced the highest metamemory accuracy, word matches produced an intermediate level, and LSA produced the lowest accuracy. Students used the quantity of output in their judgments, so performance measures that related most strongly to quantity matched judgments better than measures based on answer quality. The results are compatible with an accessibility account of judgments about performance on text. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Metacognition for strategy selection during arithmetic problem-solving in young and older adults

We examined participants’ strategy choices and metacognitive judgments during arithmetic problem-solving. Metacognitive judgments were collected either prospectively or retrospectively. We tested whether metacognitive judgments are related to strategy choices on the current problems and on the immediately following problems, and age-related differences in relations between metacognition and strategy choices. Data showed that both young and older adults were able to make accurate retrospective, but not prospective, judgments. Moreover, the accuracy of retrospective judgments was comparable in young and older adults when participants had to select and execute the better strategy. Metacognitive accuracy was even higher in older adults when participants had to only select the better strategy. Finally, low-confidence judgments on current items were more frequently followed by better strategy selection on immediately succeeding items than high-confidence judgments in both young and older adults. Implications of these findings to further our understanding of age-related differences and similarities in adults’ metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive regulation for strategy selection in the context of arithmetic problem solving are discussed.     

On the relation between justification of solution method and correctness of solution in statistical problem solving

The relation between the justification of a choice of solution method and the correctness of that choice in statistical problem solving was investigated. In the first of two studies 16 subjects were asked to think aloud while solving two statistical problems. The results showed that an incorrect choice of solution method was more common when subjects did not justify their choice of solution as compared to when they justified their choice with domain-specific knowledge. Study 2 employed an experimental design. A group of 20 subjects were instructed to provide a justification for each choice of solution method, while another group of 20 subjects received no such instructions. The results showed no difference between the groups with respect to number of correct choices of solution method. A qualitative analysis of the justifications in the instructed group showed that the justifications for incorrect solution methods were more often incorrect than subjects' justifications for correct solution methods. The results in Study 2 suggested that the association found between incorrect choice of solution method and lack of justification in Study 1 was not in the first place due to a strategical deficiency on the part of the subjects but due to a lack of domain-specific knowledge.