Project

Back to overview

Modeling Human Judgment: Integrating Memory and Rule-based Processes

English title Modeling Human Judgment: Integrating Memory and Rule-based Processes
Applicant von Helversen Bettina
Number 146169
Funding scheme Project funding
Research institution Abteilung für ökonomische Psychologie Institut für Psychologie Universität Basel
Institution of higher education University of Basel - BS
Main discipline Psychology
Start/End 01.08.2013 - 31.08.2018
Approved amount 403'860.00
Show all

Keywords (4)

individual differences; computational modeling; memory; judgment and decision making

Lay Summary (German)

Lead
Die Fähigkeit gute Urteile und Entscheidungen zu fällen, ist ein Grundpfeiler menschlichen Denkens. Um die Qualität von Urteilen verbessern zu können, ist es unerlässlich, zu verstehen, wie gute Urteile gefällt werden. Das Ziel dieses Projektes ist es die kognitiven Prozesse zu erforschen, auf die Menschen ihre Urteile stützen, und diese Prozesse anhand eines kognitiven Modelles zu beschreiben.
Lay summary

Inhalt und Ziel des Forschungsprojekts

Menschen können auf zwei verschiedenen Arten zu einem Urteil gelangen: Über regelbasierten Prozesse oder gedächtnisbasierte Prozesse. Regelbasierte Prozesse nehmen an, dass Menschen eine Regel anwenden, die vorschreibt, welche Informationen für ein Urteil verwendet werden. Zum Beispiel könnte ein Arzt die Genesungsdauer bei einem Knochenbruch anhand des Alters und der Schwere des Bruches schätzen. Gedächtnisbasierte Prozesse gehen hingegen davon aus, dass Urteile anhand von ähnlichen, im Gedächtnis gespeicherten Fällen getroffen werden. So könnte ein Arzt sich zum Beispiel an frühere Patienten erinnern und wie lange die Genesung bei diesen Patienten dauerte. Das Ziel des Projektes ist es, ein kognitives Modell zu entwickeln, das regel- und gedächtnisbasierte Prozesse integriert. Anhand des Modells kann untersucht werden, in welchem Masse Menschen lernen, sich auf Regeln oder Ähnlichkeit zu stützen und wie solche individuellen Präferenzen für bestimmte Urteilsprozesse mit kognitiven Fähigkeiten, wie zum Beispiel einem guten Gedächtnis, zusammenhängen.

 Wissenschaftlicher und gesellschaftlicher Kontext

Unsere Ergebnisse könnten dazu beitragen, Schulungen zur Verbesserung von Urteilen zu entwickeln, die auf die Ansprüche der Urteilsaufgaben und die kognitiven Fähigkeiten der Beurteiler zugeschnitten sind.

 

Direct link to Lay Summary Last update: 14.06.2013

Responsible applicant and co-applicants

Employees

Publications

Publication
Stress-related changes in financial risk taking: Considering joint effects of cortisol and affect
von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2020), Stress-related changes in financial risk taking: Considering joint effects of cortisol and affect, in Psychophysiology, e13560-e13560.
Competitive retrieval strategy causes multimodal response distributions in multiple-cue judgments.
Albrecht Rebecca, Hoffmann Janina A., Pleskac Timothy J., Rieskamp Jörg, von Helversen Bettina (2019), Competitive retrieval strategy causes multimodal response distributions in multiple-cue judgments., in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, online.
Testing learning mechanisms of rule-based judgment.
Hoffmann Janina A., von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2019), Testing learning mechanisms of rule-based judgment., in Decision, advance.
How social information affects information search and choice in probabilistic inferences
Puskaric Marin, von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2018), How social information affects information search and choice in probabilistic inferences, in Acta Psychologica, 182, 166-176.
Strategy selection versus strategy blending: A predictive perspective on single- and multi-strategy accounts in multiple-cue estimation
Herzog Stefan, von Helversen Bettina (2018), Strategy selection versus strategy blending: A predictive perspective on single- and multi-strategy accounts in multiple-cue estimation, in Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(2), 233-249.
Tracing the path of forgetting in rule abstraction and exemplar retrieval
Hoffmann Janina A., von Helversen B., Weilbächer R., Rieskamp J. (2018), Tracing the path of forgetting in rule abstraction and exemplar retrieval, in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1-21.
Justifying the judgment process neither affects judgment accuracy, nor strategy use
Hoffmann Janina A., Gaissmaier W., von Helversen B. (2017), Justifying the judgment process neither affects judgment accuracy, nor strategy use, in Judgment and Decision Making, 12(6), 627-641.
Similar task features shape judgment and categorization processes
Hoffmann Janina A., von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2016), Similar task features shape judgment and categorization processes, in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, (8), 1193-1217.
Different strategies for evaluating consumer products: Attribute-and exemplar-based approaches compared
Scheibehenne Benjamin, von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2015), Different strategies for evaluating consumer products: Attribute-and exemplar-based approaches compared, in Journal of Economic Psychology, 46, 39-50.
Eye movements reveal memory processes during similarity- and rule-based decision making
Scholz Agnes, von Helversen Bettina, Rieskamp Jörg (2015), Eye movements reveal memory processes during similarity- and rule-based decision making, in Cognition, 228-246.
Selecting decision strategies: The differential role of affect
Scheibehenne Benjamin, von Helversen Bettina (2015), Selecting decision strategies: The differential role of affect, in Cognition and Emotion, 29, 158-167.
Neural substrates of similarity and rule-based strategies in judgment
von Helversen Bettina, Karlsson Linnea, Rasch Björn, Rieskamp Jörg (2014), Neural substrates of similarity and rule-based strategies in judgment, in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(809), 1-13.

Datasets

Justification in Judgment

Author Hoffmann, Janina
Publication date 04.10.2017
Persistent Identifier (PID) Justification in Judgment
Repository Open Science Framework


Collaboration

Group / person Country
Types of collaboration
Max Planck Institute for Human Development Germany (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication
University of Kansas United States of America (North America)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication
Allgemeine Psychologie, Universität Chemnitz Germany (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication
Universität Konstanz Germany (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication
Unversity of Umea Sweden (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication

Scientific events

Active participation

Title Type of contribution Title of article or contribution Date Place Persons involved
The 14th biannual conference of the German Society for Cognitive Science Talk given at a conference Explaining quantitative judgments with a mixture model combining exemplar retrieval and cue-abstraction. 03.09.2018 Darmstadt, Germany Hoffmann Janina Anna; von Helversen Bettina; Rieskamp Jörg; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Experimental Finance Conference 2018 Talk given at a conference Expectation Formation of Decision Makers in the Economy 20.06.2018 Heidelberg, Germany Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Forschungskolloquium Sozialpsychologie Freiburg Individual talk Explaining multiple cue judgment with a mixture model that combines exemplar with cue abstraction processes 09.04.2018 Freiburg, Germany Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Tagung experimentall arbeitender Psychologen 2018 Talk given at a conference Explaining quantitative judgments with a mixture model combining exemplar retrieval and cue-abstraction 11.03.2018 Marburg, Germany Rieskamp Jörg; Hoffmann Janina Anna; von Helversen Bettina; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Forschungskolloquium Sozialpsychologie Konstanz Individual talk Explaining multiple cue judgment with a mixture model that combines exemplar with cue abstraction processes 14.12.2017 Konstanz, Germany Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
58th Meeting of the Psychonomic Society Talk given at a conference Unstacking Judgment: What response distributions reveal about the cognitive processes in multiple-cue judgment. 16.11.2017 Vancouver, Canada von Helversen Bettina; Hoffmann Janina Anna; Rieskamp Jörg; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Annual meeting for subjective utility, probability and decision making Talk given at a conference Integrating cue abstraction with retrieval from memory: A learning approach. 28.08.2017 Haiffa, Israel Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca; Hoffmann Janina Anna; von Helversen Bettina;
Annual meeting for subjective utility, probability and decision making Talk given at a conference Explaining multiple cue judgment with a mixture model that combines exemplar with cue abstraction processes 28.08.2017 Haifa, Israel Hoffmann Janina Anna; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca; Rieskamp Jörg; von Helversen Bettina;
50th Annual Meeting of the Society for Mathematical Psychology. Talk given at a conference Integrating cue abstraction with retrieval from memory: A learning approach 22.07.2017 Warwick, Great Britain and Northern Ireland von Helversen Bettina; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca; Hoffmann Janina Anna;
MathPsych/ICCM 2017 Talk given at a conference Explaining multiple cue judgment with a mixture model that combines exemplar with cue abstraction processes 22.07.2017 Warwick, Great Britain and Northern Ireland Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca; Hoffmann Janina Anna; von Helversen Bettina; Rieskamp Jörg;
Forschungskolloquium Kognitive Entscheidungspsychologie Individual talk Explaining multiple cue judgment with a mixture model that combines exemplar with cue abstraction processes 12.12.2016 Zürich, Switzerland Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca;
Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen 2016 Talk given at a conference An exemplar-based random walk model for quantitative estimation 21.03.2016 Heidelberg, Germany von Helversen Bettina; Albrecht-Dietsch Rebecca; Hoffmann Janina Anna; Rieskamp Jörg;
Colloquium talks in Experimental Psychology Individual talk Memory foundations of human judgment 15.09.2014 London, Great Britain and Northern Ireland Hoffmann Janina Anna;
Decision Making Bristol 2014 Poster Pillars of judgment: How memory abilities affect performance in rule-based and exemplar-based judgments 09.09.2014 Bristol, Great Britain and Northern Ireland Hoffmann Janina Anna; Rieskamp Jörg; von Helversen Bettina;
7th Annual JDM Workshop for Early-Career Researchers Individual talk How does forgetting affect judgment processes? 02.07.2014 Mannheim, Germany Rieskamp Jörg; von Helversen Bettina; Hoffmann Janina Anna;
56. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen Individual talk Learning rules in judgment: A comparison of the delta-learning rule and linear regression models 30.03.2014 Giessen, Germany Rieskamp Jörg; von Helversen Bettina; Hoffmann Janina Anna;
54. Meeting of the Psychonomic Society Individual talk Pillars of judgment: How memory abilities affect rule and exemplar-based judgments 14.11.2013 Toronto, Canada von Helversen Bettina; Rieskamp Jörg; Hoffmann Janina Anna;


Self-organised

Title Date Place
Workshop on Memory and Decision Making Processes 14.05.2015 Hölstein, Switzerland

Awards

Title Year
Steven-Karger-Preis der Fakultät für Psychologie, Universität Basel 2015

Associated projects

Number Title Start Funding scheme
160277 Memory Processes in Judgment and Decision Making: Bridging the Gap 01.04.2015 International Exploratory Workshops
130192 The Memory Foundation of Judgment and Categorization Processes 01.08.2010 Project funding

Abstract

Making good judgments is a core competence and a prerequisite for success in personal and professional contexts. Making a wrong call when deciding to invest in a new business idea, or when assessing the probability that a prisoner will commit a crime when released on parole, can ruin many people’s lives. However, in order to improve people’s judgments, it is crucial to understand the cognitive processes underlying judgments.Past research suggests that people use at least two different kinds of strategies when making judgments: rule- and memory-based strategies. For instance, a doctor could evaluate a patient’s speed of recovery as a linear function of the severity of symptoms and the age of the patient. In this case, he or she would rely on a rule-based strategy. In contrast, s/he could also rely on a memory-based strategy, assessing recovery by comparing the current patient to similar patients s/he has treated before and how fast they recovered. There is good evidence that people use both strategies when making judgments. Past research suggests that in general, people seem to prefer rule-based strategies, but rely on memory-based strategies in tasks where rule-based strategies fail, or are too difficult or too demanding to apply. This research relies on the assumption that people choose between the strategies. However, instead of choosing between strategies, people might employ both strategies simultaneously. For instance, we found that people were influenced by similarity to previously encountered persons even though they used a rule-based strategy to integrate information about their characteristics. In the current project we aim to develop a computational model that can describe how people learn to rely on a rule-based or a memory-based strategy and how they integrate the output of both strategies. Furthermore, a computational model encompassing both rule- and memory-based pro- cesses will enable us to determine the contribution of rule and memory-based strategies and how they relate to indi- vidual differences in cognitive abilities such as working memory capacity or episodic memory.We propose four subprojects that examine and test the theoretical predictions from the model and apply it to predict how people’s judgments can be improved. In Subproject 1, we will examine the key assumptions of our model. In two simulations we will investigate how the interaction between rule-based and memory-based processes can be best described. We will then use our model to reanalyze data from a previous study to link the parameters reflecting the contribution of rule- and memory-based processes with memory abilities. In Subproject 2, we will empirically test the predictions following from our model in two experiments. Additionally, we will compare our model with established rule- and memory-based judgment models. In Subproject 3, we will use our model to inves- tigate how people learn to shift from a rule-based to a memory-based judgment and apply it to understanding how judgment processes change in a dynamic environment. In Subproject 4, we will investigate how forgetting and en- coding processes affect judgment performance in tasks fostering a rule-based or memory-based judgment process.In sum, we aim to develop a computational approach to judgment processes that will enable us to under- stand and describe how people learn to rely on rule-based and memory-based judgment strategies and how these two strategies are integrated into a single judgment. Furthermore, this model allows us to specify how rule- and memory- based components of judgment strategies relate to individual differences in memory, and to use this knowledge to predict when judgment performance can be improved by enhancing memory.
-