Speed-Accuracy Tradeoffs in Sample-Based Judgment and Choice

基于样本的判断和选择中的速度与准确性权衡

• 批准号: 437923996
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Klaus Fiedler
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Psychologisches Institut
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 财政年份: 2020
• 资助国家: 德国
• 起止时间: 2019-12-31 至 2022-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/437923996?language=en
• 关键词: Speed; Accuracy; Tradeoffs; Sample; Based; Speed; Accuracy; Tradeoffs; Sample; Based

The present research project focuses on speed-accuracy tradeoffs in sample-based decisions. With increasing information sampled about two choice options, the expected accuracy increases while decision speed will decrease inevitably. A tradeoff arises as the time expended to increase accuracy can be used to increase the number of correct decisions completed within the available time. Previous research has largely neglected these tradeoffs, which are however quite common in many areas of everyday life. In our preliminary work, an experimental task was developed that allows participants to determine the amount of information sampled before they make a choice. On every trial of a sequential task, participants make a choice between two investment funds, based on binomial random samples of the two investment funds’ success on n randomly selected days. Participants win 1 payoff unit for each correct choice (of the option with the higher success rate in the population from which the sample is drawn) and they lose 1 unit for each incorrect choice. Because the total payoff is the product of the average payoff (accuracy) and the number of choices completed (speed), participants have to be both accurate and fast. However, crucially, because the number of completed choices decreases faster with increasing n than accuracy increases, a theoretically predictable finding is a dramatic accuracy bias. The vast majority of participants gather far too large samples, thereby missing the optimal number of completed choices by magnitudes. Three parallel experiments with students of psychology and economics and with depressed patients as participants corroborate this basic result. Oversampling persisted in spite of several manipulations (feedback; sample limit; choice difficulty; payoff scheme) devised to let participants experience the superiority of speedy strategies, reflecting a conspicuous metacognitive deficit. Even when participants could only win and never loose, they were reluctant to exploit speedy strategies. The goal of the depicted project is to understand and elaborate on this challenging phenomenon. First, we will replicate all preliminary findings in a new domain, independent of the surplus meaning of money investment. Second, computer simulations will determine optimal strategies for different stopping rules and sampling modes. Third, in a functional-level approach to delimit the failure to solve the tradeoff, we examine the impact of various interventions that force participants to experience the advantage of speedy strategies. The final part of the project is devoted to empirical tests of mechanistic account in terms of the evaluability notion propagated by Christopher Hsee. Accordingly, the accuracy bias can be eliminated and the dominant impact of speed will be appreciated when the presentation format renders the information cost of increasing samples more evaluable, relative to the evaluability of the payoff gained for accurate choices.

本研究项目的重点是基于样本的决策中的速度准确性权衡。随着有关两个选择选项的越来越多的信息，预期准确性会提高，而决策速度将不可避免地降低。随着探索时间提高精度的时间，可以使用权衡取舍，以增加可用时间内完成的正确决策数量。先前的研究在很大程度上忽略了这些权衡，但是在每天生活的许多领域中，这些折衷都很普遍。在我们的初步工作中，制定了一项实验任务，该任务允许参与者在选择之前确定所采样的信息量。在每项顺序任务的试验中，参与者基于两个投资基金在n随机选择的日子上成功的二项式随机样本，在两个投资基金之间进行选择。参与者为每个正确的选择（选项的选项中的成功率较高的人口中的成功率）赢得了1个收益单位，并且每个不正确的选择都会失去1个单位。由于总收益是平均收益（准确性）的产物和完成的选择数（速度），因此参与者必须既准确又快速。但是，完全，因为完成的选择的数量随着n的增加而不是准确的增加而降低，所以理论上可预测的发现是一种巨大的精度偏差。绝大多数参与者收集了太大的样本，因此缺少通过磁性完成的最佳选择。与心理学和经济学学生以及沮丧的患者作为参与者的三个平行实验证实了这一基本结果。尽管有几种操纵（反馈；选择难度；回报计划），但仍持续过采样，以使参与者体验快速策略的优越性，反映出明显的元认知赤字。即使参与者只能获胜而永不放松，他们也不愿探索快速的策略。所描述的项目的目的是了解和详细说明这种挑战现象。首先，我们将在一个新领域中复制所有初步发现，而与货币投资的盈余含义无关。其次，计算机模拟将确定不同停止规则和采样模式的最佳策略。第三，在一种功能级别的方法来划定无法解决权衡的方法中，我们研究了各种干预措施的影响，这些干预措施迫使参与者体验快速策略的优势。该项目的最后一部分是根据克里斯托弗·HSEE传播的评估概念的经验检验。根据准确性偏差，可以消除速度的主要影响，而当演示格式将增加样本的信息成本更加有价值时，相对于对准确选择的收益的评估，将增加样本的价值。