Related Experiment Videos
Explaining purportedly irrational behavior by modeling skepticism in task parameters: an example examining confidence
Craig R M McKenzie1, John T Wixted, David C Noelle
1University of California-San Diego, Department of Psychology, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109, USA. cmckenzie@ucsd.edu
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
|September 10, 2004
Summary
This study introduces a new model for understanding decision-making, accounting for participants not fully believing experimenter assertions. This approach better explains confidence reports in visual identification tasks.
Area of Science:
- Cognitive Psychology
- Decision Science
- Behavioral Economics
Background:
- Many studies on irrational behavior assume participants fully trust experimenter-stated task parameters.
- Previous research observed discrepancies in confidence reports between yes-no and forced-choice formats.
Purpose of the Study:
- To develop and test a normative model that does not assume full belief in asserted task parameters.
- To provide a more accurate account of confidence reports in decision-making tasks.
Main Methods:
- Derivation of a novel normative model incorporating partial belief in assertions.
- Conducting two visual identification experiments to test the model's predictions.
Main Results:
- The new normative model successfully explains confidence reports where previous models failed.
- Experimental data align with the predictions of the model that accounts for belief uncertainty.
Conclusions:
- Participant belief in task parameters significantly influences confidence reports.
- The developed normative model offers a more robust framework for analyzing decision-making behavior.