The appropriacy of averaging in the study of context effects
The appropriacy of averaging in the study of context effects
复制标题
平均在情境效应研究中的适用性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Daniel R. Little
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shi Xian Liew;P. Howe;Daniel R. Little
人类决策模型旨在同时解释相似性、吸引力和妥协效应。然而，人们在同一范式中表现出所有三种效应的证据来自于对参与者的选择进行平均计算的研究。只有当这些参与者表现出本质上相似的选择行为时，这种平均才是合理的。为了调查这种情况是否属实，我们重复了Trueblood（《心理学公报与评论》，19(5),962-968,2012）和Berkowitsch， Scheibehenne, and Rieskamp（《实验心理学杂志》，143(3),1331-1348,2014）之前进行的两个实验。我们发现个体在选择行为上表现出质的差异。一般来说，人们不会同时表现出这三种情境效应。相反，我们发现有些人倾向于表现出相似效应或妥协效应，而不是两者兼而有之。更重要的是，许多人表现出强烈的维度偏见，这种偏见比环境的影响要大得多。这项研究强调了不分青红皂白地平均的危险，以及在决策中考虑个体差异和维度偏差的必要性。
Models of human decision-making aim to simultaneously explain the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects. However, evidence that people show all three effects within the same paradigm has come from studies in which choices were averaged over participants. This averaging is only justified if those participants show qualitatively similar choice behaviors. To investigate whether this was the case, we repeated two experiments previously run by Trueblood (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(5), 962-968, 2012) and Berkowitsch, Scheibehenne, and Rieskamp (Journal of Experimental Psychology, 143(3), 1331–1348, 2014). We found that individuals displayed qualitative differences in their choice behavior. In general, people did not simultaneously display all three context effects. Instead, we found a tendency for some people to show either the similarity effect or the compromise effect but not both. More importantly, many individuals showed strong dimensional biases that were much larger than any effects of context. This research highlights the dangers of averaging indiscriminately and the necessity for accounting for individual differences and dimensional biases in decision-making.