Challenging some common beliefs: Empirical work within the adaptive toolbox metaphor

Arndt Bröder and Ben Newell

Judgment and Decision Making, 2008, vol. 3, pages 205-214

Abstract: The authors review their own empirical work inspired by the adaptive toolbox metaphor. The review examines factors influencing strategy selection and execution in multi-attribute inference tasks (e.g., information costs, time pressure, memory retrieval, dynamic environments, stimulus formats, intelligence). An emergent theme is the re-evaluation of contingency model claims about the elevated cognitive costs of compensatory in comparison with non-compensatory strategies. Contrary to common assertions about the impact of cognitive complexity, the empirical data suggest that manipulated variables exert their influence at the meta-level of deciding how to decide (i.e., which strategy to select) rather than at the level of strategy execution. An alternative conceptualisation of strategy selection, namely threshold adjustment in an evidence accumulation model, is also discussed and the difficulty in distinguishing empirically between these metaphors is acknowledged.

Keywords: strategy selection; contingency model; cognitive costs (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
View list of references

Downloads: (external link)
http://journal.sjdm.org/bn2.pdf (application/pdf)
http://journal.sjdm.org/bn2/bn2.html (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jdm:journl:v:3:y:2008:i::p:205-214

Access Statistics for this article

Judgment and Decision Making is edited by Jonathan Baron

More articles in Judgment and Decision Making from Society for Judgment and Decision Making
Series data maintained by Jonathan Baron ().