Response error and processing biases in confidence judgment

Previous studies showed that random error can explain overconfidence effects typically observed in the literature. One of these studies concluded that, after accounting for random error effects in the data, there is little support for cognitive‐processing biases in confidence elicitation. In this paper, we investigate more closely the random error explanation for overconfidence. We generated data from four models of confidence and then estimated the magnitude of random error in the data. Our results show that, in addition to the true magnitude of random error specified in the simulations, the error estimates are influenced by important cognitive‐processing biases in the confidence elicitation process. We found that random error in the response process can account for the degree of overconfidence found in calibration studies, even when that overconfidence is actually caused by other factors. Thus, the error models say little about whether cognitive biases are present in the confidence elicitation process. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A cost-benefit analysis of demand for food.

Laboratory studies of consumer demand theory require assumptions regarding the definition of price in the absence of a medium of exchange (money). In this study we test the proposition that the fundamental dimension of price is a cost-benefit ratio expressed as the effort expended per unit of food value consumed. Using rats as subjects, we tested the generality of this "unit price" concept by varying four dimensions of price: fixed-ratio schedule, number of food pellets per fixed-ratio completion, probability of reinforcement, and response lever weight or effort. Two levels of the last three factors were combined in a 2 x 2 x 2 design giving eight groups. Each group was studied under a series of six FR schedules. Using the nominal values of all factors to determine unit price, we found that grams of food consumed plotted as a function of unit price followed a single demand curve. Similarly, total work output (responses x effort) conformed to a single function when plotted in terms of unit price. These observations provided a template for interpreting the effects of biological factors, such as brain lesions or drugs, that might alter the cost-benefit ratio.     

Choice with delayed and probabilistic reinforcers: effects of variability, time between trials, and conditioned reinforcers.

In a discrete-trials procedure with pigeons, a response on a green key led to a 4-s delay (during which green houselights were lit) and then a reinforcer might or might not be delivered. A response on a red key led to a delay of adjustable duration (during which red houselights were lit) and then a certain reinforcer. The delay was adjusted so as to estimate an indifference point--a duration for which the two alternatives were equally preferred. Once the green key was chosen, a subject had to continue to respond on the green key until a reinforcer was delivered. Each response on the green key, plus the 4-s delay that followed every response, was called one "link" of the green-key schedule. Subjects showed much greater preference for the green key when the number of links before reinforcement was variable (averaging four) than when it was fixed (always exactly four). These findings are consistent with the view that probabilistic reinforcers are analogous to reinforcers delivered after variable delays. When successive links were separated by 4-s or 8-s "interlink intervals" with white houselights, preference for the probabilistic alternative decreased somewhat for 2 subjects but was unaffected for the other 2 subjects. When the interlink intervals had the same green houselights that were present during the 4-s delays, preference for the green key decreased substantially for all subjects. These results provided mixed support for the view that preference for a probabilistic reinforcer is inversely related to the duration of conditioned reinforcers that precede the delivery of food.     

Criterion-related construct validity

Established results on latent variable models are applied to the study of the validity of a psychological test. When the test predicts a criterion by measuring a unidimensional latent construct, not only must the total score predict the criterion, but the joint distribution of criterion scores and item responses must exhibit a certain pattern. The presence of this population pattern may be tested with sample data using the stratified Wilcoxon rank sum test. Often, criterion information is available only for selected examinees, for instance, those who are admitted or hired. Three cases are discussed: (i) selection at random, (ii) selection based on the current test, and (iii) selection based on other measures of the latent construct. Discriminant validity is also discussed.This work was supported in part by Grant SES-87-01890 from the Measurement Methods and Data Improvement Program of the U.S. National Science Foundation.     

Psychological conceptions of randomness

This article presents a critique of the concept of randomness as it occurs in the psychological literature. The first section of our article outlines the significance of a concept of randomness to the process of induction; we need to distinguish random and non-random events in order to perceive lawful regularities and formulate theories concerning events in the world. Next we evaluate the psychological research that has suggested that human concepts of randomness are not normative. We argue that, because the tasks set to experimental subjects are logically problematic, observed biases may be an artifact of the experimental situation and that even if such biases do generalise they may not have pejorative implications for induction in the real world. Thirdly we investigate the statistical methodology utilised in tests for randomness and find it riddled with paradox. In a fourth section we find various branches of scientific endeavour that are stymied by the problems posed by randomness. Finally we briefly mention the social significance of randomness and conclude by arguing that such a fundamental concept merits and requires more serious considerations.     

Probability and delay of reinforcement as factors in discrete-trial choice.

Pigeons chose between two alternatives that differed in the probability of reinforcement and the delay to reinforcement. A peck on the red key always produced a delay of 5 s and then a possible reinforcer. The probability of reinforcement for responding on this key varied from .05 to 1.0 in different conditions. A response on the green key produced a delay of adjustable duration and then a possible reinforcer, with the probability of reinforcement ranging from .25 to 1.0 in different conditions. The green-key delay was increased or decreased many times per session, depending on a subject's previous choices. The purpose of these adjustments was to estimate an indifference point, or a delay that resulted in a subject's choosing each alternative about equally often. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was five times higher on the green key, the green-key delay averaged about 12 s at the indifference point. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was twice as high on the green key, the green-key delay at the indifference point was about 8 s with high probabilities and about 6 s with low probabilities. An analysis based on these results and those from studies on delay of reinforcement suggests that pigeons' choices are relatively insensitive to variations in the probability of reinforcement between .2 and 1.0, but quite sensitive to variations in probability between .2 and 0.     

Units of analysis and kinetic structure of behavioral repertoires

It is suggested that molar streams of behavior are constructed of various arrangements of three elementary constituents (elicited, evoked, and emitted response classes). An eight-cell taxonomy is elaborated as a framework for analyzing and synthesizing complex behavioral repertoires based on these functional units. It is proposed that the local force binding functional units into a smoothly articulated kinetic sequence arises from temporally arranged relative response probability relationships. Behavioral integration is thought to reflect the joint influence of the organism's hierarchy of relative response probabilities, fluctuating biological states, and the arrangement of environmental and behavioral events in time.     

Reinforcer pathology,probabilistic choice,and medication adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis

The reinforcer pathology model posits that core behavioral economic mechanisms, including delay discounting and behavioral economic demand, underlie adverse health decisions and related clinical disorders. Extensions beyond substance use disorder and obesity, however, are limited. Using a reinforcer pathology framework, this study evaluates medical adherence decisions in patients with multiple sclerosis. Participants completed behavioral economic measures, including delay discounting, probability discounting, and a medication purchase task. A medical decision-making task was also used to evaluate how sensitivity to mild side effect risk and efficacy contributed to the likelihood of taking a hypothetical disease-modifying therapy. Less steep delay discounting and more intense (greater) medication demand were independently associated with greater adherence to the medication decision-making procedure. More generally, the pattern of interrelations between the medication-specific and general behavioral economic metrics was consistent with and contributes to the reinforcer pathology model. Additional research is warranted to expand these models to different populations and health behaviors, including those of a positive health orientation (i.e., medication adherence).     

An evaluation of the reliability of probability judgments across response modes and over time

Despite the importance of probability assessment methods in behavioral decision theory and decision analysis, little attention has been directed at evaluating their reliability and validity. In fact, no comprehensive study of reliability has been undertaken. Since reliability is a necessary condition for validity, this oversight is significant. The present study was motivated by that oversight. We investigated the reliability of probability measures derived from three response modes: numerical probabilities, pie diagrams, and odds. Unlike previous studies, the experiment was designed to distinguish systematic deviations in probability judgments, such as those due to experience or practice, from random deviations. It was found that subjects assessed probabilities reliably for all three assessment methods regardless of the reliability measures employed. However, a small but statistically significant decrease over time in the magnitudes of assessed probabilities was observed. This effect was linked to a decrease in subjects overconfidence during the course of the experiment.     

On the sampling theory roundations of item response theory models

Item response theory (IT) models are now in common use for the analysis of dichotomous item responses. This paper examines the sampling theory foundations for statistical inference in these models. The discussion includes: some history on the stochastic subject versus the random sampling interpretations of the probability in IRT models; the relationship between three versions of maximum likelihood estimation for IRT models; estimating versus estimating -predictors; IRT models and loglinear models; the identifiability of IRT models; and the role of robustness and Bayesian statistics from the sampling theory perspective.A presidential address can serve many different functions. This one is a report of investigations I started at least ten years ago to understand what IRT was all about. It is a decidedly one-sided view, but I hope it stimulates controversy and further research. I have profited from discussions of this material with many people including: Brian Junker, Charles Lewis, Nicholas Longford, Robert Mislevy, Ivo Molenaar, Donald Rock, Donald Rubin, Lynne Steinberg, Martha Stocking, William Stout, Dorothy Thayer, David Thissen, Wim van der Linden, Howard Wainer, and Marilyn Wingersky. Of course, none of them is responsible for any errors or misstatements in this paper. The research was supported in part by the Cognitive Science Program, Office of Naval Research under Contract No. Nooo14-87-K-0730 and by the Program Statistics Research Project of Educational Testing Service.