Pre-decisional information acquisition: Why do we pay too much for information? Brief report

Abstract People tend to acquire more information while making their decisions than a rational and risk-neutral benchmark would predict. We conduct a carefully designed experiment to derive five plausible reasons for pre-decision information overpurchasing. The results show that overpurchasing of information can be almost entirely explained by systematic information processing errors (misestimation or incorrect Bayesian updating), possibly caused by biased intuitive decision processes. Other factors, such as overoptimism about the validity of the new information, risk aversion, ambiguity aversion, and curiosity about (irrelevant) information, play at most a minor role. Our results imply that information overacquisitions are mainly driven by the overestimation of the usefulness of additional information.

[1]  W. Allen,et al.  Bidding and Overconfidence in Experimental Financial Markets , 2005 .

[2]  Alison King Chung Lo,et al.  Consumer Sequential Search: Not Enough or Too Much? , 2003 .

[3]  E. Yechiam,et al.  The coexistence of overestimation and underweighting of rare events and the contingent recency effect , 2009, Judgment and Decision Making.

[4]  Terence Connolly,et al.  Information search in judgment tasks: The effects of unequal cue validity and cost , 1984 .

[5]  A. Elstein.  Clinical judgment: psychological research and medical practice. , 1976, Science.

[6]  N. Schmitt,et al.  Cost-benefit determinants of decision process and accuracy , 1993 .

[7]  G. Loewenstein.  The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. , 1994 .

[8]  Ramon L. Hershman,et al.  Deviations from optimum information-purchase strategies in human decision-making , 1970 .

[9]  Marcel Zeelenberg,et al.  When curiosity killed regret: Avoiding or seeking the unknown in decision-making under uncertainty , 2007 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[11]  W. Edwards.  Optimal strategies for seeking information: Models for statistics, choice reaction times, and human information processing ☆ , 1965 .

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

[13]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[14]  N. Weinstein.  Unrealistic optimism about future life events , 1980 .

[15]  D. Ellsberg.  Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[16]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[17]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[18]  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.

[19]  J. Edward Russo,et al.  Stopping criteria in sequential choice , 1996 .

[20]  E. Berner,et al.  Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. , 2008, The American journal of medicine.

[21]  Daniel Hausmann,et al.  Sequential evidence accumulation in decision making: The individual desired level of confidence can explain the extent of information acquisition , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[22]  W. McIsaac,et al.  Overestimation Error and Unnecessary Antibiotic Prescriptions for Acute Cystitis in Adult Women , 2011, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[23]  Robin M. Hogarth,et al.  Overconfidence in absolute and relative performance: The regression hypothesis and Bayesian updating , 2009 .

[24]  J. Burger,et al.  Learning about unchosen alternatives: When does curiosity overcome regret avoidance? , 2009 .

[25]  Kristin Diehl,et al.  When Two Rights Make a Wrong: Searching Too Much in Ordered Environments , 2005 .