Judgment and decision making: Behavioral approaches

Effects of delay sequence in a delay discounting task

Delay discounting refers to the decrease in subjective value of a reward as the delay until its receipt increases. In the present study we assessed the effects of the sequence of delay blocks (increasing or decreasing) on discounting and the data systematicity using a titrating procedure with human participants. All participants completed the delay discounting task in both an increasing and decreasing sequence of delays. Delays ranged from one day to ten years. We found steeper discounting when the delays were presented in an increasing sequence compared with when they were presented in a decreasing sequence. We also found steeper discounting when participants completed the increasing sequence condition first. Our results agree with other findings reported in the literature and suggest that delay discounting may be affected by prior and subsequent experience.

Clinical Reasoning in School Psychology

School psychologists typically conduct psychological and psychoeducational assessments, provide prevention and intervention services, and consult and collaborate with allied professionals (e.g., teachers, physicians, psychiatrists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, social workers, and nurses) and parents toward better understanding and promoting the learning and development of children and youth. Within and across these roles, school psychologists maximize their judgments by utilizing psychometrically sound instruments, recommending and using empirically based intervention programs and approaches, and making informed decisions based on theory, research, and clinical experience. The purposes of this article and this special edition of the Canadian Journal of School Psychology are to promote the relevance and significance of clinical reasoning in this complex process of full service delivery and highlight examples of the effective thinking and decision making undertaken by school psychologists from assessment to intervention.

GAMBLING: SOMETIMES UNSEEMLY; NOT WHAT IT SEEMS

Gambling offers opportunities for basic research and theory, and has hugely important applied implications. As I have said recently: "The current view of pathological gambling as an addiction cries out for a functional analysis of the controlling variables and for strategies of behavioral intervention." (Fantino, 2008). This view echoed that of Dixon (2007), who called out for behavior analysts to apply their very relevant skills to discovering the causes of gambling disorders. To understand the behavior of gambling, one must understand the basic processes and variables involved in making the decisions gamblers make. Behavior analysts, those experimental psychologists who approach psychological phenomena from a behavioral (or functional) perspective, have long concentrated on the choices organisms make. Thus, they should be in a strong position to contribute to our appreciation of the factors controlling gambling. In this paper we will examine some of the advances already made, and also propose some directions for future research.

Simple heuristics and rules of thumb: Where psychologists and behavioural biologists might meet

The Centre for Adaptive Behaviour and Cognition (ABC) has hypothesised that much human decision-making can be described by simple algorithmic process models (heuristics). This paper explains this approach and relates it to research in biology on rules of thumb, which we also review. As an example of a simple heuristic, consider the lexicographic strategy of Take The Best for choosing between two alternatives: cues are searched in turn until one discriminates, then search stops and all other cues are ignored. Heuristics consist of building blocks, and building blocks exploit evolved or learned abilities such as recognition memory; it is the complexity of these abilities that allows the heuristics to be simple. Simple heuristics have an advantage in making decisions fast and with little information, and in avoiding overfitting. Furthermore, humans are observed to use simple heuristics. Simulations show that the statistical structures of different environments affect which heuristics perform better, a relationship referred to as ecological rationality. We contrast ecological rationality with the stronger claim of adaptation. Rules of thumb from biology provide clearer examples of adaptation because animals can be studied in the environments in which they evolved. The range of examples is also much more diverse. To investigate them, biologists have sometimes used similar simulation techniques to ABC, but many examples depend on empirically driven approaches. ABC's theoretical framework can be useful in connecting some of these examples, particularly the scattered literature on how information from different cues is integrated. Optimality modelling is usually used to explain less detailed aspects of behaviour but might more often be redirected to investigate rules of thumb.

Decision-making: Context matters

Research and theory in human decision-making has increasingly stressed the importance of the context in which the problem is embedded. This emphasis is consistent with that supported by research of behavior analysts on natural concept formation and in problem solving, as well as in the study of choice. We present data on reasoning problems that further support the role of context in decision-making.

Behavior-analytic approaches to decision making

Behavior analysis has much to offer the study of phenomena in the area of judgement and decision making. We review several research areas that should continue to profit from a behavior-analytic approach, including the relative merit of contingency-based and rule-governed instruction of solving algebra and analogy problems, and the role of conditioned reinforcement and the inter-trial interval in a type of Prisoner's Dilemma Game. We focus on two additional areas: (1) the study of base-rate neglect, a notorious reasoning fallacy and (2) the study of the sunk-cost effect, which characterizes ill-conceived investment decisions. In each of these two cases we review studies with humans and pigeons as subjects.

Escalation research: providing new frontiers for applying behavior analysis to organizational behavior

Decision fiascoes such as escalation of commitment, the tendency of decision makers to "throw good money after bad," can have serious consequences for organizations and are therefore of great interest in applied research. This paper discusses the use of behavior analysis in organizational behavior research on escalation. Among the most significant aspects of behavior-analytic research on escalation is that it has indicated that both the patterns of outcomes that decision makers have experienced for past decisions and the patterns of responses that they make are critical for understanding escalation. This research has also stimulated the refinement of methods by researchers to better assess decision making and the role reinforcement plays in it. Finally, behavior-analytic escalation research has not only indicated the utility of reinforcement principles for predicting more complex human behavior but has also suggested some additional areas for future exploration of decision making using behavior analysis.

Effects of competitive reward distribution on auditing and competitive responding

This study allowed subjects to audit each other's responding during a series of competitive contests. Six pairs of female college students competed in 3-min contests in which the competitive response was a knob pull. A sum of money was divided using a proportional distribution or a 100%/0% reward distribution. In the proportional distribution, a subject's proportion of the sum was her proportion of the total number of responses. Also, in every contest either subject could make a response that would end the contest prematurely and give both subjects the same amount: a sum equal to 33% of the competitive total. Each subject could press either or both of two audit buttons that displayed her own and the other's response total for 10 s. Results replicated earlier findings in showing the superiority of the proportional distribution in total number of competitive responses made. No subject audited continuously, and only 1 audited most of the time. Most audits were interpersonal, including both own and other's scores. Auditing typically was more frequent in 100%/0% contests in which subjects were more likely to stop the contest when they were far behind. Winners were more likely to audit than were losers. Competitive response rates increased when the differences revealed by audits were small and decreased when they were large. Overall audit patterns were consistent with the view that feedback as "news" is more often sought when it can lead to improved outcomes.