Hilbig Benjamin E, Pohl Rüdiger F
Psychology III, Schloss Ehrenhof Ost, University of Mannheim, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Sep;35(5):1296-305. doi: 10.1037/a0016565.
According to part of the adaptive toolbox notion of decision making known as the recognition heuristic (RH), the decision process in comparative judgments-and its duration-is determined by whether recognition discriminates between objects. By contrast, some recently proposed alternative models predict that choices largely depend on the amount of evidence speaking for each of the objects and that decision times thus depend on the evidential difference between objects, or the degree of conflict between options. This article presents 3 experiments that tested predictions derived from the RH against those from alternative models. All experiments used naturally recognized objects without teaching participants any information and thus provided optimal conditions for application of the RH. However, results supported the alternative, evidence-based models and often conflicted with the RH. Recognition was not the key determinant of decision times, whereas differences between objects with respect to (both positive and negative) evidence predicted effects well. In sum, alternative models that allow for the integration of different pieces of information may well provide a better account of comparative judgments.
根据决策适应性工具箱概念中被称为识别启发式（RH）的部分内容，比较判断中的决策过程及其持续时间取决于识别是否能区分不同对象。相比之下，一些最近提出的替代模型预测，选择很大程度上取决于支持每个对象的证据数量，因此决策时间取决于对象之间的证据差异或选项之间的冲突程度。本文呈现了3个实验，这些实验对基于RH得出的预测与替代模型的预测进行了检验。所有实验都使用自然识别的对象，且未向参与者传授任何信息，从而为RH的应用提供了最佳条件。然而，结果支持了基于证据的替代模型，且常常与RH相冲突。识别并非决策时间的关键决定因素，而对象在（正、负）证据方面的差异能很好地预测效果。总之，允许整合不同信息片段的替代模型很可能能更好地解释比较判断。
