Hierarchical models of simple mechanisms underlying confidence in decision making

Choice confidence is a central measure in psychological decision research, often being reported on a probabilistic scale. Simple mechanisms that describe the psychological processes underlying choice confidence, including those based on error and confirmation biases, have typically received support via fits to data averaged over subjects. While averaged data ease model development, they can also destroy important aspects of the confidence data distribution. In this paper, we develop a hierarchical model of raw confidence judgments using the beta distribution, and we implement two simple confidence mechanisms within it. We use Bayesian methods to fit the hierarchical model to data from a two-alternative confidence experiment, and we use a variety of Bayesian tools to diagnose shortcomings of the simple mechanisms that are overlooked when applied to averaged data. Bugs code for estimating the models is also supplied.     

A group construal account of drop-in-the-bucket thinking in policy preference and moral judgment

Decisions, both moral and mundane, about saving individuals or resources at risk are often influenced not only by numbers saved and lost, but also by proportions of groups saved and lost. Consider choosing between a program that saves 60 of 240 lives at risk and one that saves 50 of 100. The first option maximizes absolute number saved; the second, proportion saved. In two studies, we show that the influence of proportions on such decisions depends on how items at risk are mentally represented. In particular, we show that proportions have greater influence on people's decisions to the extent that the items at risk are construed as forming groups, as opposed to distinct individuals. Construal was manipulated by means of animated displays in which resources at risk moved either independently (promoting individual construal) or jointly (promoting group construal). Results support the hypothesis that (a) decision makers form mental representations which vary in the degree to which resources at risk are construed as groups versus individuals and (b) construal of resources as groups promotes the influence of proportions on decisions and moral judgments.     

A Qualitative Analysis of Power Differentials in Ethical Situations in Academia

Power and organizational hierarchies are ubiquitous to social institutions that form the foundation of modern society. Power differentials may act to constrain or enhance people’s ability to make good ethical decisions. However, little scholarly work has examined perceptions of this important topic. The present effort seeks to address this issue by interviewing academics about hypothetical ethical problems that involve power differences among those involved. Academics discussed what they would do in these scenarios, often drawing on their own experiences. Using a think-aloud protocol, participants were prompted to discuss their reasoning and thinking behind their ethical decisions. These interview data were content analyzed using a semantic analysis program that identified a number of distinct ways that academics think about power differences and abuses in ethical situations. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Rational Choice and Moral Decision Making in Research

University psychology and sociology researchers rated the likelihood they would engage in misconduct as described in 9 research scenarios, while also making moral judgments and rating the likelihood of discovery and sanctions. Multiple regression revealed significant effects across various scenarios for moral judgment as well as shame and embarrassment on reducing misconduct. The effects on misconduct of the perceived probability of sanctions were conditioned on moral judgments in some scenarios. The results have implications for how universities address the prevention, detection, and sanctioning of research misconduct.     

What a feeling! Touching sexually laden stimuli makes women seek rewards

We argue that women's previously documented unresponsiveness to sexual primes when making economic decisions may be a consequence of the specific types of primes that have been used (i.e., visual primes). In three studies we show that presenting women with tactile sexual cues does influence their decisions about economic rewards. Similar to the effect found in men, the first study demonstrates that touching a pair of boxer shorts leads to a craving for monetary rewards in women. In the second study it is shown that touching a pair of boxers makes women less loss averse for both money and food. The third study explicitly focuses on the relative effectiveness of tactile versus visual sexual cues in altering women's economic decisions, and reveals that women's willingness-to-pay for economic rewards increases only when the sexual cue is tactile. We suggest that touching (vs. seeing) sexually laden stimuli prompts pre-programmed consummatory Pavlovian responses that promote approaching economic rewards.     

Decision-specific reinvestment scale: An exploration of its construct validity,and association with stress and coping appraisals

ObjectiveThis research project aimed to explore the construct validity of the Decision-Specific Reinvestment Scale (DSRS); more specifically, its links with stress and coping appraisals.DesignStudy 1 validated the DSRS and the Movement-Specific Reinvestment Scale (MSRS) to the French language, in order to examine the construct validity of the DSRS using the MSRS, the Preference for Intuition and Deliberation (PID) inventory and the Melbourne Decision-Making Questionnaire (MDMQ). In addition, sex differences in reinvestment were investigated. Study 2 examined stress and coping appraisals of high and low reinvesters.MethodIn study 1, 379 athletes completed the DSRS, MSRS, PID, and MDMQ. In study 2, 100 handball players, classified as low and high reinvesters, completed surveys aimed to assess stressor intensity, stressor perceived controllability, coping effectiveness, subjective performance and coping strategies with the Coping Inventory for Competitive Sport over three games.ResultsIn study 1, we found that intuitive athletes scored lower on the DSRS in comparison to deliberative athletes, whilst no difference was found for the MSRS. Convergent and discriminant validity was illustrated with the subscales of the MDMQ. No sex differences were found regarding reinvestment. In study 2, findings showed that low reinvesters scored higher than high reinvesters in terms of stressor perceived controllability, coping effectiveness and subjective performance.DiscussionIn addition to confirmation of construct validity, these findings strengthen our understanding of how high decision reinvesters perceive a pressured situation. Key applications are derived from our findings informing coaches and athletes in offsetting the negative effects of reinvestment on sport performance.     

Automatic question generation and answer assessment for subjective examination

Automatic generation of questions and evaluating their answers is a highly challenging task in natural language processing and educational technology. This work focuses on generating subjective questions and also an evaluation system is suggested for assessing the answers. For generating the questionnaires, key-phrases are extracted from the course curriculum (syllabus). Next, based on the key-phrases, different types of subjective questions are generated. Finally, the evaluation of student’s responses is achieved using a multi-criteria-decision-making approach. It uses a set of model answers taken from different textbooks and subject experts to evaluate the answers. Multiple measures are used to assess the answers by comparing them with this model set. The results of the profound system reveal that the automated appraisal process can reduce the manual effort of the human.     

The Secrecy Heuristic: Inferring Quality from Secrecy in Foreign Policy Contexts

Three experiments demonstrate that in the context of U.S. foreign policy decision making, people infer informational quality from secrecy. In Experiment 1, people weighed secret information more heavily than public information when making recommendations about foreign political candidates. In Experiment 2, people judged information presented in documents ostensibly produced by the Department of State and the National Security Council as being of relatively higher quality when those documents were secret rather than public. Finally, in Experiment 3, people judged a National Security Council document as being of higher quality when presented as a secret document rather than a public document and evaluated others' decisions more favorably when those decisions were based on secret information. Discussion centers on the mediators, moderators, and broader implications of this secrecy heuristic in foreign policy contexts.     

Who’s bringing the donuts: The role of affective patterns in group decision making

Two studies examined how intragroup affective patterns influence groups’ pervasive tendency to ignore the unique expertise of their members. Using a hidden profile task, Study 1 provided evidence that groups with at least one member experiencing positive affect shared more unique information than groups composed entirely of members experiencing neutral affect. This occurred because group members experiencing positive affect were more likely to initiate unique information sharing, as well as information seeking. Study 2 built upon this base by showing that confidence mediates the relationship between positive affect and the initiation of unique information sharing. Additionally, Study 2 investigated the role of negative affect in group decision making and how negative and positive affect concurrently influence decision making when groups are composed of members experiencing each. The results are discussed in terms of the role affect plays in influencing group behavior and the resultant importance of investigating specific affective patterns.     

The vision heuristic: Judging music ensembles by sight alone

Team effectiveness and group performance are often defined by standards set by domain experts. Professional musicians consistently report that sound output is the most important standard for evaluating the quality of group performance in the domain of music. However, across six studies, visual information dominated rapid judgments of group performance. Participants (1062 experts and novices) were able to select the actual winners of live ensemble competitions and distinguish top-ranked orchestras from non-ranked orchestras based on 6-s silent video recordings yet were unable to do so from sound recordings or recordings with both video and sound. These findings suggest that judgments of group performance in the domain of music are driven at least in part by visual cues about group dynamics and leadership.