Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

3.4K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now? 
3.4K
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

7.2K
In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the...
7.2K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

6.4K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
6.4K
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

86
Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
86
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

4.0K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
4.0K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

5.3K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
5.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Reply to Quillien: Intuitive preferences and interpretive humility in intentionality judgments.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025
Same author

Correction: The Open Anchoring Quest Dataset: Anchored Estimates from 96 Studies on Anchoring Effects.

Journal of open psychology data·2025
Same author

Belief in belief: Even atheists in secular countries show intuitive preferences favoring religious belief.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025
Same author

'So Help Me God'? Does oath swearing in courtroom scenarios impact trial outcomes?

British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)·2023
Same author

Caricatured facial movements enhance perception of emotional facial expressions.

Perception·2022
Same author

The Einstein effect provides global evidence for scientific source credibility effects and the influence of religiosity.

Nature human behaviour·2022
Same journal

Emergence of collective mental time travel pathways upon remembering consequential elections.

Communications psychology·2026
Same journal

Teams perform worse when newcomers hold critical information than when original group members do.

Communications psychology·2026
Same journal

Auditory perceptual maps in humans and mice share common structures and predict perceptual decisions in discrimination learning.

Communications psychology·2026
Same journal

Cross-cultural evidence for positive control and mind-mindedness as buffers for parental distress.

Communications psychology·2026
Same journal

Why sycophantic LLMs may imperil interactive norms between humans.

Communications psychology·2026
Same journal

Early detection of distinct language development in infants of mothers with severe mental illness using fNIRS.

Communications psychology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 4, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

634

Biased expectations about future choice options predict sequential economic decisions.

Didrika S van de Wouw1, Ryan T McKay1, Nicholas Furl2

  • 1Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK.

Communications Psychology
|December 18, 2024
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

People exhibit decision bias in optimal stopping problems, often undersampling options due to pessimistic future expectations. This research identifies mechanisms behind this bias in full-information scenarios.

More Related Videos

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.0K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 4, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

634
Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.0K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.6K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive psychology
  • Decision science
  • Computational modeling

Background:

  • Optimal stopping problems involve sequential choices without recall or foresight.
  • Human decision-making in these scenarios often deviates from optimal strategies.
  • Previous research highlights biases in sequential search and selection tasks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify mechanisms driving decision bias in a realistic full-information optimal stopping problem.
  • To investigate the impact of sequence length and payoff schemes on sampling behavior.
  • To develop and test computational models explaining observed biases.

Main Methods:

  • Computational modeling was employed to analyze decision-making processes.
  • Participants engaged in a realistic full-information optimal stopping task.
  • Sequence length and payoff schemes were manipulated to observe effects on sampling rates.

Main Results:

  • Participants showed reluctance to increase sampling rates when optimal, leading to undersampling bias.
  • Suboptimally pessimistic expectations about future options were identified as a key factor.
  • Computational models indicated mis-specified prior distributions contribute to bias.

Conclusions:

  • Human decision bias in full-information problems stems from pessimistic future expectations.
  • Understanding these biases can improve real-world sequential search strategies.
  • Findings offer insights for optimizing online platforms for option presentation.