PSYCH OpenIR  > 中国科学院行为科学重点实验室
Alternative TitleTests of the Integrative Model and Priority Heuristic Model from the Point of View of Choice Process: Evidence from an Eye-tracking Study
汪祚军1; 李纾1
Source Publication心理学报
Contribution Rank2
Other AbstractTheories intended to describe decision making under risk and uncertainty can be divided into integrative models and heuristic models, according to their theoretical basis. The integrative model implies that individuals integrate outcomes and probabilities in a compensatory way and select the option with the highest weighted sum. The heuristic model, in contrast, assumes that people do not integrate these kinds of information but rely on a repertoire of simple decision strategies, called heuristics, to make inferences, choices, estimations, and other decisions. The present paper tested the integrative model and the priority heuristic model from the point of view of choice process by using an eye-tracking system. The results show that the decision time and information acquisition pattern differ when participants make choices according to their own rules as opposed to making choices according to the imposed EV/PH rule. Specifically, the decision time did not decrease with the increased difference between the CPT values in the self-rule condition, as it did in the imposed EV rule condition. Process measures further indicated that individuals did not rely on deliberate or automatic calculations of weighted sums because attribute-based transitions were observed more frequently than option-based transitions in the self-rule condition. Furthermore, crossed transitions occurred more frequently when the two choices were cross-presented than when they were not. These results conflict with the prediction of the integrative model. Brandstatter et al. (2006) claimed that the priority heuristic could not only provide superior predictions of the output of a choice process but could also account for information acquisition. The information, Brandstatter suggested, should be considered in the order of minimum outcome, probability of minimum outcome, and maximum outcome. Although the measure of decision time supported the PH in the present study, process measures contrasted with the PH. More attention (dwelling time, fixation count and transitions) was paid to the maximum outcome than to the minimum outcome in "one-step" decision problems, and more attention (dwelling time, fixation count and transitions) was paid to the probability of maximum outcome than to the probability of minimum outcome in "three-step" decision problems. These results conflict with the prediction of the priority heuristic. In sum, neither the integrative model nor the priority heuristic could account for the data that we observed on choice process. This study encourages the use of process-oriented models and data in decision research rather than simply assessing the predictions of as-if models.
Keyword整合模型 占优启发式模型 累积预期理论 决策过程 眼动
Subject Area认知心理学
Indexed ByCSCD
Funding Organization国家重点基础研究发展计划(2011cB711000)、国家自然科学基金面上项目(31170976)、中国科学院知识创新工程重要方向项目(KSCX2-EW-J-8)、北京市重点学科建设项目以及宁波大学预研基金项目(xyy10009)和宁波大学学科项目(szxw1018)资助.
Citation statistics
Document Type期刊论文
Corresponding Author李纾
Recommended Citation
GB/T 7714
汪祚军,李纾. 对整合模型和占优启发式模型的检验:基于信息加工过程的眼动研究证据[J]. 心理学报,2012,44(2):179-198.
APA 汪祚军,&李纾.(2012).对整合模型和占优启发式模型的检验:基于信息加工过程的眼动研究证据.心理学报,44(2),179-198.
MLA 汪祚军,et al."对整合模型和占优启发式模型的检验:基于信息加工过程的眼动研究证据".心理学报 44.2(2012):179-198.
Files in This Item:
File Name/Size DocType Version Access License
对整合模型和占优启发式模型的检验_基于信(1242KB) 限制开放CC BY-NC-SAView Application Full Text
Related Services
Recommend this item
Usage statistics
Export to Endnote
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[汪祚军]'s Articles
[李纾]'s Articles
Baidu academic
Similar articles in Baidu academic
[汪祚军]'s Articles
[李纾]'s Articles
Bing Scholar
Similar articles in Bing Scholar
[汪祚军]'s Articles
[李纾]'s Articles
Terms of Use
No data!
Social Bookmark/Share
File name: 对整合模型和占优启发式模型的检验_基于信息加工过程的眼动研究证据_汪祚军[1].pdf
Format: Adobe PDF
All comments (0)
No comment.

Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.