Reconciling Compensatory and Noncompensatory Strategies of Cue Weighting: A Causal Model Approach

When forming a judgment about any unknown item, people must draw inferences from information that is already known. This paper examines causal relationships between cues as a relevant factor influencing how people determine the amount of weight to place on each piece of available evidence. We propose that people draw from their beliefs about specific causal relationships between cues when determining how much weight to place on those cues, and that understanding this process can help reconcile differences between predictions of compensatory and lexicographic heuristic strategies. As causal relationships change, different cues become more or less important. Across three experiments, we find support for the use of causal models in determining cue weights, but leave open the possibility that they work in concert with other strategies as well. We conclude by discussing relative strengths and weaknesses of the causal model approach relative to existing models, and suggest areas for future research. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Illtyd Trethowan.  Causality , 1938 .

[2]  K. R. Hammond.  Probabilistic functioning and the clinical method. , 1955, Psychological review.

[3]  P. Hoffman.  The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment. , 1960, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[5]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  LEXICOGRAPHIC ORDERS, UTILITIES AND DECISION RULES: A SURVEY , 1974 .

[6]  John W. Payne,et al.  Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis☆ , 1976 .

[7]  R. Olshavsky,et al.  Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Brand Choice , 1979 .

[8]  R. Dawes.  Judgment under uncertainty: The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making , 1979 .

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  Causal Schemata in Judgments under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[10]  John W. Payne,et al.  Effort and Accuracy in Choice , 1985 .

[11]  B. Weiner.  "Spontaneous" causal thinking. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[13]  G. Bower,et al.  From conditioning to category learning: an adaptive network model. , 1988 .

[14]  B. Brehmer,et al.  Chapter 3 What Have we Learned about Human Judgment from Thirty Years of Policy Capturing , 1988 .

[15]  Eugene Charniak,et al.  Bayesian Networks without Tears , 1991, AI Mag..

[16]  Michael R. Waldmann,et al.  Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: asymmetries in cue competition. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  John W. Payne,et al.  The adaptive decision maker: Name index , 1993 .

[18]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[19]  N. Pennington,et al.  Reasoning in explanation-based decision making , 1993, Cognition.

[20]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The adaptive decision maker , 1993 .

[21]  D. Hilton.  THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF REASONING : CONVERSATIONAL INFERENCE AND RATIONAL JUDGMENT , 1995 .

[22]  Ray W. Cooksey,et al.  Judgment analysis : theory, methods, and applications , 1996 .

[23]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  A Comparison of Two Process Tracing Methods for Choice Tasks , 1996 .

[24]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  Feature Centrality and Conceptual Coherence , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[25]  P. Todd,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .

[26]  C. Gettys,et al.  MINERVA-DM: A memory processes model for judgments of likelihood. , 1999 .

[27]  A. Bröder.  Assessing the empirical validity of the "take-the-best" heuristic as a model of human probabilistic inference. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  C. Glymour.  The Mind's Arrows: Bayes Nets and Graphical Causal Models in Psychology , 2000 .

[29]  J. Swait,et al.  The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching , 2001 .

[30]  Magnus Persson,et al.  PROBabilities from EXemplars (PROBEX): a "lazy" algorithm for probabilistic inference from generic knowledge , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[31]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. , 2002 .

[32]  Magnus Persson,et al.  PROBabilities from EXemplars (PROBEX): a "lazy" algorithm for probabilistic inference from generic knowledge , 2002 .

[33]  A. Bröder.  Decision making with the "adaptive toolbox": influence of environmental structure, intelligence, and working memory load. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[34]  D. Kahneman.  A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[35]  B. Monin.  The warm glow heuristic: when liking leads to familiarity. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  B. Newell,et al.  Take the best or look at the rest? Factors influencing "one-reason" decision making. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  Inferring causal networks from observations and interventions , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[38]  M. Lee,et al.  Evidence accumulation in decision making: Unifying the “take the best” and the “rational” models , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[39]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Spontaneous Discounting of Availability in Frequency Judgment Tasks , 2022 .

[40]  Robin M. Hogarth,et al.  Ignoring information in binary choice with continuous variables: When is less “more”? , 2005 .

[41]  S. Sloman.  Causal Models: How People Think about the World and Its Alternatives , 2005 .

[42]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Structure and strength in causal induction , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[43]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  Do We "do"? , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[44]  Russell C. Burnett,et al.  Feature inference and the causal structure of categories , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[45]  Michael R. Waldmann,et al.  Seeing versus doing: two modes of accessing causal knowledge. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[46]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  How causal knowledge simplifies decision-making , 2006, Minds and Machines.

[47]  Arndt Bröder,et al.  Stimulus format and working memory in fast and frugal strategy selection , 2006 .

[48]  J. Rieskamp,et al.  SSL: a theory of how people learn to select strategies. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[49]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer.  Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity: problems with using long words needlessly , 2006 .

[50]  S. Sloman,et al.  The causal psycho-logic of choice , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[51]  Michael R. Waldmann,et al.  Combining Versus Analyzing Multiple Causes: How Domain Assumptions and Task Context Affect Integration Rules , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[52]  A. Gopnik,et al.  Causal learning : psychology, philosophy, and computation , 2007 .

[53]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  A response-time approach to comparing generalized rational and take-the-best models of decision making. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[54]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  Causal reasoning through intervention , 2007 .

[55]  R. García-Retamero,et al.  Does causal knowledge help us be faster and more frugal in our decisions? , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[56]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Heuristic and linear models of judgment: matching rules and environments. , 2007, Psychological review.

[57]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Heuristics made easy: an effort-reduction framework. , 2008, Psychological bulletin.

[58]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  A rose in any other font would not smell as sweet: Effects of perceptual fluency on categorization , 2008, Cognition.

[59]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Investigations in spontaneous discounting , 2009, Memory & cognition.

[60]  S. Sloman,et al.  Decision makers conceive of their choices as interventions. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[61]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  When one model casts doubt on another: a levels-of-analysis approach to causal discounting. , 2011, Psychological bulletin.

[62]  Lael J. Schooler,et al.  Does the structure of causal models predict information search , 2011 .

[63]  Philip M. Fernbach,et al.  Asymmetries in predictive and diagnostic reasoning. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[64]  Benjamin M. Rottman,et al.  Reasoning about causal relationships: Inferences on causal networks. , 2014, Psychological bulletin.

[65]  Neil R. Bramley,et al.  Conservative forgetful scholars: How people learn causal structure through sequences of interventions. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[66]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Staying afloat on Neurath's boat - Heuristics for sequential causal learning , 2015, CogSci.

[67]  B. Rehder,et al.  Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected , 2015, Cognitive Psychology.