{"title":"Successful everyday decision making: Combining attributes and\n associates","authors":"A. Banks, David M. Gamblin","doi":"10.1017/s1930297500009414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n How do people make everyday decisions in order to achieve the most\n successful outcome? Decision making research typically evaluates choices\n according to their expected utility. However, this research largely focuses\n on abstract or hypothetical tasks and rarely investigates whether the\n outcome is successful and satisfying for the decision maker. Instead, we use\n an everyday decision making task in which participants describe a personally\n meaningful decision they are currently facing. We investigate the decision\n processes used to make this decision, and evaluate how successful and\n satisfying the outcome of the decision is for them. We examine how well\n analytic, attribute-based processes explain everyday decision making and\n predict decision outcomes, and we compare these processes to associative\n processes elicited through free association. We also examine the\n characteristics of decisions and individuals that are associated with good\n decision outcomes. Across three experiments we found that: 1) an analytic\n decision analysis of everyday decisions is not superior to simpler\n attribute-based processes in predicting decision outcomes; 2) contrary to\n research linking associative cognition to biases, free association generates\n valid cues that predict choice and decision outcomes as effectively as\n attribute-based approaches; 3) contrary to research favouring either\n attribute-based or associative processes, combining both attribute-based and\n associates best explains everyday decisions and most accurately predicts\n decision outcomes; and 4) individuals with a tendency to attempt analytic\n thinking do not make more successful everyday decisions. Instead, frequency,\n simplicity, and knowledge of the decision predict success. We propose that\n attribute-based and associative processes, in combination, both explain\n everyday decision making and predict successful decision outcomes.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500009414","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
How do people make everyday decisions in order to achieve the most
successful outcome? Decision making research typically evaluates choices
according to their expected utility. However, this research largely focuses
on abstract or hypothetical tasks and rarely investigates whether the
outcome is successful and satisfying for the decision maker. Instead, we use
an everyday decision making task in which participants describe a personally
meaningful decision they are currently facing. We investigate the decision
processes used to make this decision, and evaluate how successful and
satisfying the outcome of the decision is for them. We examine how well
analytic, attribute-based processes explain everyday decision making and
predict decision outcomes, and we compare these processes to associative
processes elicited through free association. We also examine the
characteristics of decisions and individuals that are associated with good
decision outcomes. Across three experiments we found that: 1) an analytic
decision analysis of everyday decisions is not superior to simpler
attribute-based processes in predicting decision outcomes; 2) contrary to
research linking associative cognition to biases, free association generates
valid cues that predict choice and decision outcomes as effectively as
attribute-based approaches; 3) contrary to research favouring either
attribute-based or associative processes, combining both attribute-based and
associates best explains everyday decisions and most accurately predicts
decision outcomes; and 4) individuals with a tendency to attempt analytic
thinking do not make more successful everyday decisions. Instead, frequency,
simplicity, and knowledge of the decision predict success. We propose that
attribute-based and associative processes, in combination, both explain
everyday decision making and predict successful decision outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.