The effect of preference learning on context effects in multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice

被引:6
|
作者
Liu, Yanjun [1 ]
Trueblood, Jennifer S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Dept Psychol & Brain Sci, 1101 E 10th St, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Context effects; Inherent preferences; Constructed preferences; Experience; Multi-alternative multi-attribute; decision-making; MULTIALTERNATIVE DECISION; EXPERIENCE; ATTRACTION; SIMILARITY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105365
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Within the domain of preferential choice, it has long been thought that context effects, such as the attraction and compromise effects, arise due to the constructive nature of preferences and thus should not emerge when preferences are stable. We examined this hypothesis with a series of experiments where participants had the opportunity to experience selected alternatives and develop more enduring preferences. In our tasks, the options are presented in a description-based format so that participants need only learn their preferences for various options rather than the objective values of those options. Our results suggest that context effects can still emerge when stable preferences form through experience. This suggests that multi-alternative, multi -attribute decisions are likely influenced by relative evaluations, even when participants have the opportunity to experience options and learn their preferences. We hypothesize what was learned from experience in our tasks is the weights for various attributes. Through model simulations, we show that the observed choice patterns are well captured by a model with unequal attribute weights. A secondary finding is that the direction of observed context effects is opposite to standard effects and appears to be quite robust. Model simulations show that reserved effects can arise through various processes including representational noise and sensitivity to advantages and disadvantages when comparing options.
引用
收藏
页数:26
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Multi-attribute, multi-alternative models of choice,: Choice, reaction time, and process tracing
    Cohen, Andrew L.
    Kang, Namyi
    Leise, Tanya L.
    COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 98 : 45 - 72
  • [2] Response-time data provide critical constraints on dynamic models of multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice
    Evans, Nathan J.
    Holmes, William R.
    Trueblood, Jennifer S.
    PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2019, 26 (03) : 901 - 933
  • [3] Response-time data provide critical constraints on dynamic models of multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice
    Nathan J. Evans
    William R. Holmes
    Jennifer S. Trueblood
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2019, 26 : 901 - 933
  • [4] Cognitive and Neural Bases of Multi-Attribute, Multi-Alternative, Value-based Decisions
    Busemeyer, Jerome R.
    Gluth, Sebastian
    Rieskamp, Jorg
    Turner, BrandonM.
    TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2019, 23 (03) : 251 - 263
  • [5] VAMP (Voting Agent Model of Preferences): A computational model of individual multi-attribute choice
    Bergner, Anouk S.
    Oppenheimer, Daniel M.
    Detre, Greg
    COGNITION, 2019, 192
  • [6] Hierarchical competitions subserving multi-attribute choice
    Hunt, Laurence T.
    Dolan, Raymond J.
    Rehrens, Timothy E. J.
    NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 17 (11) : 1613 - 1622
  • [7] A Dynamic Computational Model of Gaze and Choice in Multi-Attribute Decisions
    Yang, Xiaozhi
    Krajbich, Ian
    PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2023, 130 (01) : 52 - 70
  • [8] Decision uncertainty in multi-attribute stated preference studies
    Dekker, Thijs
    Hess, Stephane
    Brouwer, Roy
    Hofkes, Marjan
    RESOURCE AND ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2016, 43 : 57 - 73
  • [9] Multi-attribute heuristics and intertemporal choices
    Herweg, Fabian
    Weinschenk, Philipp
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2022, 200 : 174 - 181
  • [10] The Neurodynamic Decision Variable in Human Multi-alternative Perceptual Choice
    Kohl, Carmen
    Spieser, Laure
    Forster, Bettina
    Bestmann, Sven
    Yarrow, Kielan
    JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 2019, 31 (02) : 262 - 277