DDRIG in DRMS: Knowing Less Than We Can Tell: Assessing Metacognitive Knowledge in Subjective, Multi-Attribute Choice

我们每天都在做决定，这些决定可能会影响我们未来的幸福。但我们真的知道自己是如何做出这些决定的吗？该项目提出了一种新的方法来探索决策者如何做出决策的知识-心理学家称之为元认知知识。该方法是专门设计来评估决策者的元认知知识时，他们作出主观决策，他们必须在不同的因素之间进行权衡。该方法用于探索人们如何思考他们所做的决定的一系列问题。开发和测试这种方法很重要，因为它使我们能够更好地了解人们如何做出个人决定，如买车或买房，以及与政策相关的决定，如投票给哪位候选人或支持哪项政策。这些知识可以在设计干预措施和决策环境，帮助人们做出更好的decisions.The项目提出了一个新的范式，评估元认知知识的主观，多属性的选择decisions. The有用。在这种范式中，参与者被要求完成基于选择的结合（CBC）任务，然后自我报告影响（即，他们认为每个属性对他们的决策过程都有影响。将这些自我报告的权重与通过CBC任务的分层贝叶斯估计估计的揭示权重进行比较，其中较高的对应性表明较高的元认知知识。所提出的研究试图验证范式，实现范式以隔离各种元认知机制（例如，元认知控制，元认知监控），并使用该范例来探索元认知知识在经典决策现象中可能扮演的角色（例如，框架效应）。该项目的主要贡献是扩展元推理（即，推理中的元认知）文献--主要关注客观决策--转化为主观决策，这些决策非常重要，通常对个人的福祉有重大影响。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Every day we make decisions that can impact our happiness well into the future. But do we really know how we make these decisions? This project proposes a new method for exploring decision makers’ knowledge of how they make decisions – which psychologists refer to as metacognitive knowledge. This method is specifically designed to assess decision makers’ metacognitive knowledge when they are making subjective decisions in which they must make tradeoffs between different factors. The method is used to explore a range of questions about how people think about the decisions that they make. Developing and testing this method is important because it allows us to better understand how people make not only personal decisions, such as buying a car or house, but also policy-relevant decisions, such as which candidate to vote for or which policy to endorse. This knowledge can be useful in designing interventions and decision environments that help people make better decisions.The project presents a novel paradigm for assessing metacognitive knowledge in subjective, multi-attribute choice decisions. In this paradigm, participants are asked to complete a Choice-Based Conjoint (CBC) task, then self-report the influence (i.e., weight) they believe each attribute had on their decision-making process. These self-reported weights are compared to revealed weights estimated via Hierarchical Bayes Estimation from the CBC task, with higher correspondence indicating greater metacognitive knowledge. The proposed studies seek to validate the paradigm, implement the paradigm to isolate various metacognitive mechanisms (e.g., metacognitive control, metacognitive monitoring), and use the paradigm to explore the role that metacognitive knowledge may play in classic decision phenomena (e.g., framing effects). The primary contribution of this project is to expand the meta-reasoning (i.e., metacognition in reasoning) literature – which has primarily focused on objective decisions – into subjective decisions, which are highly important and often have significant impacts on individuals’ well-being.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.