Inferring the biggest and best: a measurement model for applying recognition to evoke consideration sets and judge between multiple alternatives


Autoria(s): Beaman, C. Philip
Data(s)

01/09/2013

Resumo

It has long been supposed that preference judgments between sets of to-be-considered possibilities are made by means of initially winnowing down the most promising-looking alternatives to form smaller “consideration sets” (Howard, 1963; Wright & Barbour, 1977). In preference choices with >2 options, it is standard to assume that a “consideration set”, based upon some simple criterion, is established to reduce the options available. Inferential judgments, in contrast, have more frequently been investigated in situations in which only two possibilities need to be considered (e.g., which of these two cities is the larger?) Proponents of the “fast and frugal” approach to decision-making suggest that such judgments are also made on the basis of limited, simple criteria. For example, if only one of two cities is recognized and the task is to judge which city has the larger population, the recognition heuristic states that the recognized city should be selected. A multinomial processing tree model is outlined which provides the basis for estimating the extent to which recognition is used as a criterion in establishing a consideration set for inferential judgments between three possible options.

Formato

text

Identificador

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/30848/1/For%20Cog%20Systems1%28Clean%29.pdf

Beaman, C. P. <http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/view/creators/90000286.html> (2013) Inferring the biggest and best: a measurement model for applying recognition to evoke consideration sets and judge between multiple alternatives. Cognitive Systems Research, 24. pp. 18-25. ISSN 1389-0417 doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2012.12.004 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2012.12.004> (Cognitive Systems Research:Special Issue on ICCM2012)

Idioma(s)

en

Publicador

Elsevier

Relação

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/30848/

creatorInternal Beaman, C. Philip

10.1016/j.cogsys.2012.12.004

Tipo

Article

PeerReviewed