Yechiam Eldad, Ashby Nathaniel J S, Konstantinidis Emmanouil
Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Israel.
Harrisburg University of Science and Technology, United States of America.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2020 Apr;205:103057. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103057. Epub 2020 Mar 17.
In Ashby, Konstantinidis, and Yechiam (2017) we argued that the variance in people's choices in decisions from experience stems from uncertainty about preferences. This was confirmed by high correlations between the variance in experiential choices and subsequent one-shot policy decisions: both showing considerable diversification. In the present paper we address a comment regarding our paper by Plonsky and Teodorescu (2020). These authors suggested that variance in experiential choices is driven by responses to perceived patterns in prior outcomes (rather than individuals' preferences), and that these responses can also drive subsequent policy decisions. This was supported by an apparent "wavy recency" effect in our data indicatory of responses to patterns, and by an experiment showing that outcome patterns affected subsequent policy decisions. We demonstrate that our study results do not in fact show a significant wavy recency. We do find positive recency but it is very poorly correlated with the overall choice rates. Hence, we contend that the variance in choice rates mostly reflects one's preferences when there are no obvious patterns. Moreover, we argue that because Plonsky and Teodorescu's experimental manipulation was confounded with the frequency of relatively positive/negative outcomes, their results do not conclusively show an effect of response to patterns on subsequent policies.
在阿什比、康斯坦丁尼迪斯和耶恰姆（2017年）的研究中，我们认为人们在基于经验的决策中选择的差异源于偏好的不确定性。经验性选择的差异与随后的一次性政策决策之间的高度相关性证实了这一点：两者都表现出相当大的多样性。在本文中，我们回应了普隆斯基和特奥多雷斯库（2020年）对我们论文的评论。这些作者认为，经验性选择的差异是由对先前结果中感知到的模式的反应所驱动的（而不是个人偏好），并且这些反应也可以驱动随后的政策决策。这一观点得到了我们数据中明显的“波动近因效应”（表明对模式的反应）以及一项实验的支持，该实验表明结果模式会影响随后的政策决策。我们证明，我们的研究结果实际上并没有显示出显著的波动近因效应。我们确实发现了正向近因效应，但它与总体选择率的相关性非常低。因此，我们认为，当没有明显模式时，选择率的差异主要反映了个人的偏好。此外，我们认为，由于普隆斯基和特奥多雷斯库的实验操作与相对正向/负向结果的频率相互混淆，他们的结果并没有确凿地表明对模式的反应对随后政策的影响。
