The Effect of Situational Experiment Conditions on Hasty Decision Making in the ‘Beads Task’

Author:

Klevjer Kristoffer1,Pfuhl Gerit12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT–The Arctic University of Norway, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway

2. Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway

Abstract

‘Jumping to Conclusions’, or hasty decision making, is widely studied within clinical and computational psychology. It is typically investigated using the ‘beads task’, a sequential information sampling paradigm, and defining one or two draws as jumping to conclusion. Situational experimental conditions, e.g., group vs. individual testing, abstract vs. cover story, show-up fee or course credit, frequently vary between studies. Little effort has been dedicated to investigating the potential effects of demand characteristics on hasty decision making. We explored this in four samples of participants (n = 336), in different situational experiment conditions, with two distinct variations of the beads task. An abstract ‘Draws to Decision’ (DtD) variant, and a cover story combined DtD and probabilistic inferences variant. Situational conditions did not have a significant effect on overall DtD for either variant. However, when using ‘extreme scores’ (DtD of 1 or 1 to 2) as a measure of hasty decision making, situational conditions had an effect for the abstract variant, with individual testing having the fewest hasty decision makers (DtD1: Mann–Whitney U = 2137.5, p = 0.02; DtD1-2: Mann–Whitney U = 2017.5, p < 0.01), but not for the cover story variant. Our results suggest that the abstract variant is more susceptible to test conditions, especially if a categorisation is used to classify hasty decisions. This does not imply that the cover story variant is better suited to capturing jumping to conclusions behaviour, but highlights the importance of mirroring the situational conditions between different samples. We recommend that testing conditions should be fully disclosed.

Funder

Norwegian Research Council

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

General Neuroscience

Reference26 articles.

1. Rethinking delusions: A selective review of delusion research through a computational lens;Ashinoff;Schizophr. Res.,2021

2. Normal and abnormal reasoning in people with delusions;Dudley;Br. J. Clin. Psychol.,1997

3. Cognitive approaches to delusions: A critical review of theories and evidence;Garety;Br. J. Clin. Psychol.,1999

4. Reasoning in Deluded Schizophrenic and Paranoid Patients: Biases in Performance on a Probabilistic Inference Task;Garety;J. Nerv. Ment. Dis.,1991

5. Probabilistic Judgements in Deluded and Non-Deluded Subjects;Huq;Q. J. Exp. Psychol. Sect. A,1988

Cited by 1 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

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