Klevjer Kristoffer, Pfuhl Gerit
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT-The Arctic University of Norway, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway.
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway.
Brain Sci. 2023 Feb 19;13(2):359. doi: 10.3390/brainsci13020359.
'Jumping to Conclusions', or hasty decision making, is widely studied within clinical and computational psychology. It is typically investigated using the 'beads task', a sequential information sampling paradigm, and defining one or two draws as jumping to conclusion. Situational experimental conditions, e.g., group vs. individual testing, abstract vs. cover story, show-up fee or course credit, frequently vary between studies. Little effort has been dedicated to investigating the potential effects of demand characteristics on hasty decision making. We explored this in four samples of participants ( = 336), in different situational experiment conditions, with two distinct variations of the beads task. An abstract 'Draws to Decision' (DtD) variant, and a cover story combined DtD and probabilistic inferences variant. Situational conditions did not have a significant effect on overall DtD for either variant. However, when using 'extreme scores' (DtD of 1 or 1 to 2) as a measure of hasty decision making, situational conditions had an effect for the abstract variant, with individual testing having the fewest hasty decision makers (DtD1: Mann-Whitney = 2137.5, = 0.02; DtD1-2: Mann-Whitney = 2017.5, < 0.01), but not for the cover story variant. Our results suggest that the abstract variant is more susceptible to test conditions, especially if a categorisation is used to classify hasty decisions. This does not imply that the cover story variant is better suited to capturing jumping to conclusions behaviour, but highlights the importance of mirroring the situational conditions between different samples. We recommend that testing conditions should be fully disclosed.
“急于下结论”，即仓促决策，在临床心理学和计算心理学领域得到了广泛研究。通常使用“珠子任务”（一种顺序信息采样范式）进行调查，并将一两次抽取定义为急于下结论。情境实验条件，例如小组测试与个体测试、抽象情境与有故事情节的情境、出场费或课程学分，在不同研究中常常有所不同。很少有人致力于研究需求特征对仓促决策的潜在影响。我们在四个参与者样本（(n = 336)）中，在不同的情境实验条件下，使用珠子任务的两种不同变体对此进行了探究。一种是抽象的“决策抽取次数”（DtD）变体，另一种是结合了故事情节和概率推理的DtD变体。情境条件对这两种变体的总体DtD均无显著影响。然而，当使用“极端分数”（DtD为1或1至2）作为仓促决策的衡量标准时，情境条件对抽象变体有影响，个体测试中急于下结论的人最少（DtD1：曼-惠特尼(U = 2137.5)，(p = 0.02)；DtD1 - 2：曼-惠特尼(U = 2017.5)，(p < 0.01)），但对有故事情节的变体没有影响。我们的结果表明，抽象变体更容易受到测试条件的影响，特别是在使用分类来界定仓促决策时。这并不意味着有故事情节的变体更适合捕捉急于下结论的行为，而是强调了在不同样本之间反映情境条件的重要性。我们建议应充分披露测试条件。
