Effects of meal variety on expected satiation : evidence for a 'perceived volume' heuristic

Meal variety has been shown to increase energy intake in humans by an average of 29%. Historically, research exploring the mechanism underlying this effect has focused on physiological and psychological processes that terminate a meal (e.g., sensory-specific satiety). We sought to explore whether meal variety stimulates intake by influencing pre-meal planning. We know that individuals use prior experience with a food to estimate the extent to which it will deliver fullness. These ‘expected satiation’ judgments may be straightforward when only one meal component needs to be considered, but it remains unclear how prospective satiation is estimated when a meal comprises multiple items. We hypothesised that people simplify the task by using a heuristic, or ‘cognitive shortcut.’ Specifically, as within-meal variety increases, expected satiation tends to be based on the perceived volume of food(s) rather than on prior experience. In each trial, participants (N = 68) were shown a plate of food with six buffet food items. Across trials the number of different foods varied in the range one to six. In separate tasks, the participants provided an estimate of their combined expected satiation and volume. When meal variety was high, judgments of perceived volume and expected satiation ‘converged.’ This is consistent with a common underlying response strategy. By contrast, the low variety meals produced dissociable responses, suggesting that judgments of expected satiation were not governed solely by perceived volume. This evidence for a ‘volume heuristic’ was especially clear in people who were less familiar with the meal items. Together, these results are important because they expose a novel process by which meal variety might increase food intake in humans

Eye Movements in Risky Choice.

We asked participants to make simple risky choices while we recorded their eye movements. We built a complete statistical model of the eye movements and found very little systematic variation in eye movements over the time course of a choice or across the different choices. The only exceptions were finding more (of the same) eye movements when choice options were similar, and an emerging gaze bias in which people looked more at the gamble they ultimately chose. These findings are inconsistent with prospect theory, the priority heuristic, or decision field theory. However, the eye movements made during a choice have a large relationship with the final choice, and this is mostly independent from the contribution of the actual attribute values in the choice options. That is, eye movements tell us not just about the processing of attribute values but also are independently associated with choice. The pattern is simple-people choose the gamble they look at more often, independently of the actual numbers they see-and this pattern is simpler than predicted by decision field theory, decision by sampling, and the parallel constraint satisfaction model. © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.This work was supported by funding from the University of Essex Research Promotion Fund, Economic and Social Research Council grants ES/K002201/1 and ES/K004948/1, and Leverhulme grant RP2012-V-022. Raw data and R code are available from the authors and will be posted on publication.This is the final version. It was first published by Wiley at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.1854/pd

More-or-less elicitation (MOLE): reducing bias in range estimation and forecasting

Biases like overconfidence and anchoring affect values elicited from people in predictable ways – due to people’s inherent cognitive processes. The More-Or-Less Elicitation (MOLE) process takes insights from how biases affect people’s decisions to design an elicitation process to mitigate or eliminate bias. MOLE relies on four, key insights: 1) uncertainty regarding the location of estimates means people can be unwilling to exclude values they would not specifically include; 2) repeated estimates can be averaged to produce a better, final estimate; 3) people are better at relative than absolute judgements; and, 4) consideration of multiple values prevents anchoring on a particular number. MOLE achieves these by having people repeatedly choose between options presented to them by the computerised tool rather than making estimates directly, and constructing a range logically consistent with (i.e., not ruled out by) the person’s choices in the background. Herein, MOLE is compared, across four experiments, with eight elicitation processes – all requiring direct estimation of values – and is shown to greatly reduce overconfidence in estimated ranges and to generate best guesses that are more accurate than directly estimated equivalents. This is demonstrated across three domains – in perceptual and epistemic uncertainty and in a forecasting task.Matthew B. Welsh, Steve H. Beg

Mapping the Relationship Among Political Ideology, CSR Mindset, and CSR Strategy: A Contingency Perspective Applied to Chinese Managers

The literature on antecedents of corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategies of firms has been predominately content driven. Informed by the managerial sense-making process perspective, we develop a contingency theoretical framework explaining how political ideology of managers affects the choice of CSR strategy for their firms through their CSR mindset. We also explain to what extent the outcome of this process is shaped by the firm’s internal institutional arrangements and external factors impacting on the firm. We develop and test several hypotheses using data collected from 129 Chinese managers. The results show that managers with a stronger socialist ideology are likely to develop a mindset favouring CSR, which induces the adoption of a proactive CSR strategy. The CSR mindset mediates the link between socialist ideology and CSR strategy. The strength of the relationship between the CSR mindset and the choice of CSR strategy is moderated by customer response to CSR, industry competition, the role of government, and CSR-related managerial incentives