Do people treat missing information adaptively when making inferences?

Author:

Garcia-Retamero Rocio12,Rieskamp Jörg13

Affiliation:

1. Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany

2. Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

3. University of Basel, Switzerland

Abstract

When making inferences, people are often confronted with situations with incomplete information. Previous research has led to a mixed picture about how people react to missing information. Options include ignoring missing information, treating it as either positive or negative, using the average of past observations for replacement, or using the most frequent observation of the available information as a placeholder. The accuracy of these inference mechanisms depends on characteristics of the environment. When missing information is uniformly distributed, it is most accurate to treat it as the average, whereas when it is negatively correlated with the criterion to be judged, treating missing information as if it were negative is most accurate. Whether people treat missing information adaptively according to the environment was tested in two studies. The results show that participants were sensitive to how missing information was distributed in an environment and most frequently selected the mechanism that was most adaptive. From these results the authors conclude that reacting to missing information in different ways is an adaptive response to environmental characteristics.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Physiology (medical),General Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,General Medicine,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology,Physiology

Cited by 30 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Information distortion in social networks: definition, generation, and control;Proceedings of the 2023 4th International Conference on Big Data Economy and Information Management;2023-12-08

2. Toward a theory of consumer digital trust: Meta-analytic evidence of its role in the effectiveness of user-generated content;Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science;2023-11-18

3. Comparison of Naïve Decision Aides for Time-Pressured Degraded Environments;Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting;2023-09

4. Strategy-Specific Decision Making with Incomplete Information;Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting;2022-09

5. Towards a sustainability facts panel? Life Cycle Assessment data outperforms simplified communication styles in terms of consumer comprehension;Journal of Cleaner Production;2021-11

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3