Cue utilization and strategy application in stable and unstable dynamic environments

We took a novel Empirical approach to investigating dynamic decision making behavior by examining the profiles of individuals' information sampling behavior and strategy application under conditions in which the control task was unstable as well as stable. Participants were presented with a dynamic system which they interacted with by intervening on three cues in order to reach and maintain a specific outcome (goal). The system was manipulated so that in the Stable condition participants controlled an outcome that fluctuated steadily overall trials, and in the Unstable condition the outcome fluctuated erratically over trials. In general, unstable fluctuations in the outcome led people to sample all the cues most of the time, even those which had no effect on the outcome. In contrast, under Stable conditions people were more conservative in their cue sampling behavior. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to previous work on dynamic decision making and the Monitoring and Control (Osman, 2010a, 2010b) framework.

[1]  Jeroen G. W. Raaijmakers,et al.  Decision making in dynamic task environments , 1997 .

[2]  J. Funke.  Microworlds based on linear equation systems: A new approach to complex problem solving and experimental results , 1993 .

[3]  R. Catrambone.  The subgoal learning model: Creating better examples so that students can solve novel problems. , 1998 .

[4]  J. E. Tschirgi,et al.  Sensible reasoning: A hypothesis about hypotheses. , 1980 .

[5]  Donald E. Broadbent,et al.  Human Control of a Simulated Economic System , 1978 .

[6]  Z. Dienes,et al.  The role of specific instances in controlling a dynamic system , 1995 .

[7]  Faison P. Gibson,et al.  Learning and transfer in dynamic decision environments , 2007, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[8]  D. Lagnado,et al.  Spontaneous Causal Learning While Controlling A Dynamic System~!2009-08-30~!2010-01-07~!2010-07-13~! , 2010 .

[9]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  IMPACT OF PROCESS AND OUTCOME FEEDBACK ON THE RELATION OF GOAL SETTING TO TASK PERFORMANCE , 1990 .

[10]  Wiebke Putz-Osterloh.  Chapter 15 Strategies for Knowledge Acquisition and Transfer of Knowledge in Dynamic Tasks1 , 1993 .

[11]  Magda Osman,et al.  Observation Can Be as Effective as Action in Problem Solving , 2008, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  Marvin S. Cohen,et al.  Metarecognition in Time-Stressed Decision Making: Recognizing, Critiquing, and Correcting , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Gary P. Latham,et al.  The Effect of Mental Practice and Goal Setting as a Transfer of Training Intervention on Supervisors’ Self‐efficacy and Communication Skills: An Exploratory Study , 2000 .

[14]  M. Jahanshahi,et al.  Patients with Parkinson's disease learn to control complex systems via procedural as well as non-procedural learning , 2008, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Central cancellation of self-produced tickle sensation , 1998, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  Penelope M. Sanderson,et al.  Verbalizable knowledge and skilled task performance: Association, dissociation, and mental models. , 1989 .

[17]  T. Connolly,et al.  Goals, strategy development and task performance: Some limits on the efficacy of goal setting , 1989 .

[18]  B. Burns,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology Goal Specificity Effects on Hypothesis Testing in Problem Solving , 2022 .

[19]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[20]  O. Svenson,et al.  Decision making : cognitive models and explanations , 1997 .

[21]  D. Broadbent.  Levels, Hierarchies, and the Locus of Control* , 1977 .

[22]  Johanna Helena Kerstholt.  The effect of information costs on strategy selection in dynamic tasks , 1996 .

[23]  D. Broadbent,et al.  On the Relationship between Task Performance and Associated Verbalizable Knowledge , 1984 .

[24]  R. Wood,et al.  Goal setting and the differential influence of self-regulatory processes on complex decision-making performance. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  B. Brehmer.  Dynamic decision making: human control of complex systems. , 1992, Acta psychologica.

[26]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Interactive tasks and the implicit‐explicit distinction , 1988 .

[27]  R. Stevenson,et al.  Explicit Learning of a Dynamic System with a Non-salient Pattern , 1997 .

[28]  P. Ackerman,et al.  Goal setting, conditions of practice, and task performance: A resource allocation perspective. , 1994 .

[29]  K. Holyoak,et al.  The Impact of Goal Specificity on Strategy Use and the Acquisition of Problem Structure , 1996 .

[30]  M. Osman.  Controlling uncertainty: a review of human behavior in complex dynamic environments. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[31]  M. Osman.  Positive transfer and negative transfer/antilearning of problem-solving skills. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  Jared Freeman,et al.  Metarecognition in Time-Stressed Decision Making: Recognizing, Critiquing, and Correcting , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[33]  Tom Kontogiannis,et al.  The effect of training systemic information on the retention of fault-finding skills in manufacturing industries , 2004 .

[34]  D. Wolpert,et al.  The cerebellum is involved in predicting the sensory consequences of action , 1999, Neuroreport.

[35]  J. Sterman,et al.  Effects of feedback complexity on dynamic decision making , 1995 .

[36]  Cleotilde Gonzalez,et al.  Instance-based learning in dynamic decision making , 2003 .

[37]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  Relationships Among Goal Difficulty, Business Strategies, and Performance On A Complex Management Simulation Task , 1991 .

[38]  Y. S. Lee,et al.  Effects of learning contexts on implicit and explicit learning , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[39]  R. Lipshitz,et al.  Coping with Uncertainty: A Naturalistic Decision-Making Analysis , 1997 .

[40]  Gerhard Strube,et al.  The Cognitive Psychology of Knowledge , 1993 .

[41]  D. Broadbent,et al.  Implicit and explicit knowledge in the control of complex systems , 1986 .

[42]  Gregory B. Northcraft,et al.  Impact of Process and Outcome Feedback on the Relation of Goal Setting to Task Performance. , 1989 .

[43]  Dianne C. Berry,et al.  The combination of explicit and implicit learning processes in task control , 1987 .

[44]  Regina Vollmeyer,et al.  The impact of goal on strategy use and the acquisition of problem structure , 1996 .

[45]  Cleotilde González.  Decision Support for Real-Time, Dynamic Decision-Making Tasks , 2005 .

[46]  Robert E. Wood,et al.  Goal setting and the differential influence of self-regulatory processes on complex decision-making performance. , 1991 .

[47]  E. Salas,et al.  Taking stock of naturalistic decision making , 2001 .

[48]  Cleotilde Gonzalez,et al.  Instance-based learning in dynamic decision making , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[49]  Z Dienes,et al.  The Role of Implicit Memory in Controlling a Dynamic System , 1998, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[50]  R. Mathews,et al.  Insight without Awareness: On the Interaction of Verbalization, Instruction and Practice in a Simulated Process Control Task , 1989 .

[51]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  Goals and learning in microworlds , 1999, Cogn. Sci..

[52]  D. Lagnado,et al.  Spontaneous Causal Learning While Controlling A Dynamic System , 2010 .