Attractivity Weighting: Take-the-Best's Foolproof Sibling

We describe a prediction method called “Attractivity Weighting” (AW). In the case of cue-based paired comparison tasks, AW predicts a weighted average of the cue values of the most successful cues. In many situations, AW’s prediction is based on the cue value of the most successful cue, resulting in behavior similar to Take-the-Best (TTB). Unlike TTB, AW has a desirable characteristic called “access optimality”: Its long-run success is guaranteed to be at least as great as the most successful cue. While access optimality is a desirable characteristic, concerns may be raised about the short-term performance of AW. To evaluate such concerns, we here present a study of AW’s short-term performance. The results suggest that there is little reason to worry about the short-run performance of AW. Our study also shows that, in random sequences of paired comparison tasks, the behavior of AW and TTB is nearly indiscernible.

[1]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Equilibrium Play in Single-Server Queues with Endogenously Determined Arrival Times , 2004 .

[2]  P. Todd,et al.  Ecological Rationality: Intelligence in the World , 2012 .

[3]  J. Rieskamp.  The importance of learning when making inferences , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[4]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Pre-trip Information and Route-Choice Decisions with Stochastic Travel Conditions: Experiment , 2014 .

[5]  Seth Bullock,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .

[6]  Gábor Lugosi,et al.  Prediction, learning, and games , 2006 .

[7]  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.

[8]  D. Goldstein,et al.  How good are simple heuristics , 1999 .

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

[10]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  Why does one-reason decision making work? A case study in ecological rationality , 1999 .

[11]  Gerhard Schurz,et al.  The Meta‐inductivist’s Winning Strategy in the Prediction Game: A New Approach to Hume’s Problem* , 2008, Philosophy of Science.

[12]  Kevin A. Gluck,et al.  Verbalization of Decision Strategies in Multiple-Cue Probabilistic Inference , 2016 .

[13]  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.

[14]  B. Newell,et al.  Empirical tests of a fast-and-frugal heuristic: Not everyone "takes-the-best" , 2003 .

[15]  B. Newell,et al.  Search strategies in decision making: the success of “success” , 2004 .

[16]  P. Todd,et al.  The Quest for Take The Best - Insights and Outlooks from Experimental Research , 2011 .

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

[18]  Paul D. Thorn,et al.  The Revenge of Ecological Rationality: Strategy-Selection by Meta-Induction Within Changing Environments , 2015, Minds and Machines.

[19]  A. Bröder,et al.  Adaptive flexibility and maladaptive routines in selecting fast and frugal decision strategies. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.