Experts, amateurs, and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur negotiators in a novel task

Recently a controversy has arisen among behavioral decision theory researchers concerning the generalizability of research based upon student subject samples to the behavior of expert decision makers. This study compared the influence of framing and performance constraints (goals or limits) on the ability of expert and amateur negotiators to reach integrative agreements in a negotiation task novel to both. The results suggested that while experts did outperform amateurs on comparable competitive market simulations, the patterns of their performance as influenced by framing and performance constraints were consistent.     

Development of the AAS Statement on “Suicide” and “Physician Aid in Dying”

In August 2017, the American Association of Suicidology board passed a statement titled “Suicide” is not the same as “Physician aid in dying,” which was developed partly in response to the fact that aid in dying is now legal in a number of jurisdictions. In Phase 1, eight members of the AAS who had indicated interest in this issue were asked to independently draft such a statement; the convener consolidated these drafts and comments into an initial statement. In Phase 2, five additional experts who might be expected to object were asked for their independent input; the convener consolidated these with the previous draft. No one objected to the statement altogether; extensive copyediting and rewording suggestions focused primarily on issues of overlap between “suicide” and “physician aid in dying.” The resulting document represents an effort to try to accommodate the basic concerns of all participants. The document does not speak for or against legalization of this practice, but it may have bearing on whether suicide prevention professionals have an obligation to try to prevent such deaths and whether they may serve as consultants for psychological or psychiatric evaluations as sometimes required under US state law.     

Optimizing Engagement in Behavioral Parent Training: Progress Toward a Technology-Enhanced Treatment Model

Low-income families are more likely to have a child with an early-onset Behavior Disorder (BD); yet, socioeconomic strain challenges engagement in Behavioral Parent Training (BPT). This study follows a promising pilot to further examine the potential to cost-effectively improve low-income families’ engagement in and the efficiency of BPT. Low-income families were randomized to (a) Helping the Noncompliant Child (HNC; McMahon & Forehand, 2003), a weekly, mastery-based BPT program that includes both the parent and child or (b) Technology-Enhanced HNC (TE-HNC), which includes all of the standard HNC components plus a parent mobile application and therapist web portal that provide between-session monitoring, modeling, and coaching of parent skill use with the goal of improved engagement in the context of financial strain. Relative to HNC, TE-HNC families had greater homework compliance and mid-week call participation. TE-HNC completers also required fewer weeks to achieve skill mastery and, in turn, to complete treatment than those in HNC without compromising parent satisfaction with treatment; yet, session attendance and completion were not different between groups. Future directions and clinical implications are discussed.     

Socially Situated Transmission: The Bias to Transmit Negative Information is Moderated by the Social Context

Cultural evolutionary theory has identified a range of cognitive biases that guide human social learning. Naturalistic and experimental studies indicate transmission biases favoring negative and positive information. To address these conflicting findings, the present study takes a socially situated view of information transmission, which predicts that bias expression will depend on the social context. We report a large-scale experiment (N = 425) that manipulated the social context and examined its effect on the transmission of the positive and negative information contained in a narrative text. In each social context, information was progressively lost as it was transmitted from person to person, but negative information survived better than positive information, supporting a negative transmission bias. Importantly, the negative transmission bias was moderated by the social context: Higher social connectivity weakened the bias to transmit negative information, supporting a socially situated account of information transmission. Our findings indicate that our evolved cognitive preferences can be moderated by our social goals.     

Choosing what to choose from: Preference for inclusion over exclusion when constructing consideration sets from large choice sets

Decision making is a two‐stage process, consisting of, first, consideration set construction and then final choice. Decision makers can form a consideration set from a choice set using one of two strategies: including the options they wish to further consider or excluding those they do not wish to further consider. The authors propose that decision makers have a relative preference for an inclusion (vs. exclusion) strategy when choosing from large choice sets and that this preference is driven primarily by a lay belief that inclusion requires less effort than exclusion, particularly in large choice sets. Study 1 demonstrates that decision makers prefer using an inclusion (vs. exclusion) strategy when faced with large choice sets. Study 2 replicates the effect of choice set size on preference for consideration set construction strategy and demonstrates that the belief that exclusion is more effortful mediates the relative preference for inclusion in large choice sets. Studies 3 and 4 further support the importance of perceived effort, demonstrating a greater preference for inclusion in large choice sets when decision makers are primed to think about effort (vs. accuracy; Study 3) and when the choice set is perceived as requiring more effort because of more information being presented about each alternative (vs. more alternatives in the choice set; Study 4). Finally, Study 5 manipulates consideration set construction strategy, showing that using inclusion (vs. exclusion) in large choice sets leads to smaller consideration sets, greater confidence in the decision process, and a higher quality consideration set.