32 research outputs found
Conscious and Unconscious Thought in Risky Choice: Testing the Capacity Principle and the Appropriate Weighting Principle of Unconscious Thought Theory
Daily we make decisions ranging from the mundane to the seemingly pivotal that shape our lives. Assuming rationality, all relevant information about oneâs options should be thoroughly examined in order to make the best choice. However, some findings suggest that under specific circumstances thinking too much has disadvantageous effects on decision quality and that it might be best to let the unconscious do the busy work. In three studies we test the capacity assumption and the appropriate weighting principle of Unconscious Thought Theory using a classic risky choice paradigm and including a âdeliberation with informationâ condition. Although we replicate an advantage for unconscious thought (UT) over âdeliberation without information,â we find that âdeliberation with informationâ equals or outperforms UT in risky choices. These results speak against the generality of the assumption that UT has a higher capacity for information integration and show that this capacity assumption does not hold in all domains. Furthermore, we show that âdeliberate thought with informationâ leads to more differentiated knowledge compared to UT which speaks against the generality of the appropriate weighting assumption
When time is (not) money:Preliminary guidance on the interchangeability of time and money in laboratory-based risk research
The endowment effect and beliefs about the market
The endowment effect occurs when people assign a higher value to an item they own than to the same item when they do not own it, and this effect is often taken to reflect an ownership-induced change in the intrinsic value people assign to the object. However recent evidence shows that valuations made by buyers and sellers are influenced by market prices provided for the individual products, suggesting a role for beliefs about the markets. Here we elicit individualsâ beliefs about whole distributions of market prices, enabling us to quantify whether or not a given transaction constitutes a âgood dealâ and to demonstrate how an endowment effect may reflect such considerations. In a meta-analysis and three laboratory experiments, we show for the first time that ownership has no effect on beliefs about either: (a) the quality of the item or (b) the appropriate market price for the item. Instead, we show that sellers demand a price for the item that matches their beliefs about the itemâs relative quality and the distribution of market prices in the market. Buyers, in contrast, offer less than what they believe the appropriate market price is. Thus, we argue that the endowment effect may largely reflect âadaptively rationalâ behavior on the part of both buyers and sellers (given their beliefs about relevant markets) rather than any ownership-induced bias or change in intrinsic preferences
Exponential growth, high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and vaccine effectiveness associated with the Delta variant
SARS-CoV-2 infections were rising during early summer 2021 in many countries associated with the Delta variant. We assessed RT-PCR swab-positivity in the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-1 (REACT-1) study in England. We observed sustained exponential growth with average doubling time (June-July 2021) of 25 days driven by complete replacement of Alpha variant by Delta, and by high prevalence at younger less-vaccinated ages. Unvaccinated people were three times more likely than double-vaccinated people to test positive. However, after adjusting for age and other variables, vaccine effectiveness for double-vaccinated people was estimated at between ~50% and ~60% during this period in England. Increased social mixing in the presence of Delta had the potential to generate sustained growth in infections, even at high levels of vaccination
Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial
SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87â1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98â1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87â1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication
Numeracy predicts preference consistency: Deliberative search heuristics increase choice consistency for choices from description and experience
Many people exhibit inconsistent preferences when they make
choices based on descriptive summaries as compared to choices based on prior
experiences. Theoretically, factors that promote more deliberative and skilled
decision making (e.g., statistical numeracy) should also tend to promote more
consistent choices and preferences regardless of information presentation
formats. To test this hypothesis, in two studies I investigated individual
differences in information search strategies (e.g., the amount and direction of
information search) while estimating the degree to which numeracy predicted
risky choice consistency across (a) decisions-from-description and (b) the
decisions-from-samples. Results from Study 1 revealed that numeracy was
generally associated with more extensive sampling and greater choice
consistency across paradigms. Instead of reflecting differences in logical
maximizing strategies (e.g., calculating expected values), analyses indicated
that highly-numerate participants largely generated consistent choices by
relying on heuristic-type processes (e.g., alternated between options less and
exploring options with higher outcome variability more). In Study 2, the
relationship between numeracy and choice consistency was eliminated when all
participants were forced to make choices after experiencing the same fixed
amount of sampling (i.e., provided the same amount of information). Taken
together, the results of both studies converge with and extend previous
findings (e.g., Skilled Decision Theory), indicating that numerate participants
may generally exhibit more consistent preferences and choices via
deliberatative heuristic search during decision making
Correction to Ashby and Rakow (2014):"Forgetting the Past: Individual Differences in Recency in Subjective Valuations From Experience", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, (2014), Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 1153-1162
The effect of switching costs on choice-inertia and its consequences.
In two studies we provide a novel investigation into the effects of monetary switching costs on choice-inertia (i.e., selection of the same option on consecutive choices). Study 1 employed a static decisions-from-feedback task and found that the introduction of, as well as larger, monetary switching costs led to increases in choice-inertia. While experience and decreases in the similarity of options average payouts (expected value: EV) increased choice-inertia for the option with a higher EV (the EV maximizing option), switching costs increased choice-inertia for the inferior option (the lower EV option): The proportion of total participants showing choice-inertia for the EV maximizing option also increased with switching costs. Study 2 employed a dynamic decisions-from-feedback task where halfway through the task the EV maximizing option became the inferior option. The effect of switching costs increasing choice-inertia for both the EV maximizing and the inferior option was replicated with little impact of the change in options values being detected. In sum, decision makers appear to be sensitive to switching costs, and this sensitivity can bias them towards inferior or superior options, revealing the good and the bad of choice-inertia
Focusing on what you own: Biased information uptake due to ownership
The endowment effect has been debated for over 30 years. Recent research suggests that differential focus of attention might play a role in shaping preferences. In two studies we investigated the role of biased attention in the emergence of endowment effects. We thereby derive predictions from an extended version of evidence accumulation models by additionally assuming a bias in attentional allocation based on one's endowment status. We test these predictions against an alternative account in which the endowment effect is the result of initial anchoring and adjustment differences (Sequential Value Matching model; Johnson and Busemeyer, 2005). In both studies we add deliberation time constraints to a standard Willingness-to-Accept/Willingness-to-Pay paradigm and consistently find that the endowment effect grows as deliberation time increases. In Study 2 we additionally use eye tracking and find that buyers focus more on value decreasing attributes than sellers (and vice versa for value increasing attributes). This shift in attention plays a pivotal role in the construction of value and partially mediates the endowment effect