Contrast effects or loss aversion? Comment on Usher and McClelland (2004).

M. Usher and J. L. McClelland (2004) recently proposed a new connectionist type of model to explain context effects on preferential choice including the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects. They compared their model with an earlier connectionist type model for these same effects proposed by R. Roe, J. R. Busemeyer, and J. T. Townsend (2001) and raised several new issues. The authors address these issues and point out the main theoretical differences between the 2 explanations for context effects.

[1]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[2]  N. Sanders,et al.  Journal of behavioral decision making: "The need for contextual and technical knowledge in judgmental forecasting", 5 (1992) 39-52 , 1992 .

[3]  Keith J. Holyoak,et al.  Understanding Similarity in Choice Behavior: A Connectionist Model , 2019, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.

[4]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Neural dynamics of decision making under risk: affective balance and cognitive-emotional interactions. , 1988, Psychological review.

[5]  Joshua W. Brown,et al.  How the Basal Ganglia Use Parallel Excitatory and Inhibitory Learning Pathways to Selectively Respond to Unexpected Rewarding Cues , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[6]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[7]  Wayne D. Gray.  Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 2001 .

[8]  A. Diederich.  Decision making under conflict: Decision time as a measure of conflict strength , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  Joel L. Davis,et al.  Adaptive Critics and the Basal Ganglia , 1995 .

[10]  Patrick van der Smagt,et al.  Introduction to neural networks , 1995, The Lancet.

[11]  A. Tversky.  Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

[12]  J. Townsend,et al.  Multialternative Decision Field Theory: A Dynamic Connectionist Model of Decision Making , 2001 .

[13]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice. , 2004, Psychological review.

[14]  Joel L. Davis,et al.  A Model of How the Basal Ganglia Generate and Use Neural Signals That Predict Reinforcement , 1994 .

[15]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. , 2001, Psychological review.

[16]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  Modeling Dynamic Inconsistency with a Changing Reference Point , 2003 .

[17]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Nonlinear neural networks: Principles, mechanisms, and architectures , 1988, Neural Networks.

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