Behavioral decision research is not a Linda problem: Comment on Regenwetter, Robinson, and Wang (in press)

Regenwetter, Robinson, and Wang (in press) argue that research on decision making is plagued with conjunction fallacies or “Linda Effects”. As a case study, they provide a critical analysis of Kahneman and Tversky’s seminal paper on Prospect Theory and its 1992 sequel. This commentary evaluates their criticisms and ultimately finds them to be predicated on a number of misconceptions. As argued below, a reliance on stylized effects at the aggregate level is perfectly legitimate when dismissing a received view and first proposing a new account that organizes said effects in theoretically-meaningful ways.

Prediction oriented behavioral research and its relationship to classical decision research

This paper argues that two of the common methods used in behavioral and social sciences to reduce the chances that models overfit the available data, namely heavy reliance on benchmark models and rigorous parameter estimation techniques, can slow the advancement of these sciences. An examination of classical decision research highlights how applying these methods shaped the field but have also led to limited success. As an alternative, the paper proposes a prediction-oriented approach to the development of behavioral models. Evaluating and comparing models based on their predictive power inherently guards against overfitting and also facilitates accumulation of knowledge. The paper reviews research employing the prediction-oriented approach in behavioral decision research and demonstrates that, in contrast to a common misconception, the focus on predictions can also facilitate better understanding of the underlying processes.

The Utility of Clinical Psychology Concepts for Judgment and Decision-Making Research: The Case of Histrionic Features

This research was conducted to highlight the utility of considering clinical psychology concepts in judgment and decision research. Our overarching thesis is that the judgments and choices people make may often be influenced by clinically relevant phenomena, and that understanding these relationships can, in a reciprocal fashion, help advance our understanding of judgment and decision making as well as specific clinical diagnoses and proclivities. We focused on histrionic personality disorder and conducted four studies that show that histrionic symptomology predicts preferences and choices that facilitate grabbing others’ attention, even when such choices cost more money, and are at the expense of giving up more tangible features. In addition to demonstrating a new implication of the histrionic personality, we provide insight into the process underlying this tendency and discuss implications for mental health service providers.

A systematic integrative review of cognitive biases in consumer health information seeking: emerging perspective of behavioral information research

PurposeWith the growing interest in behavioral health and medical decision-making, this systematic integrative review aims to understand research on cognitive biases in the context of consumer health information seeking and where future research opportunities may reside.Design/methodology/approachFollowing a systematic review protocol, 40 empirical research articles, out of 1,127 journal research papers from 12 academic databases, from 1995 to 2019, are included for review.FindingsThe study of cognitive biases in consumer health information seeking is a nascent and fast-growing phenomenon, with variety in publication venues and research methods. Among the 16 biases investigated, optimistic bias and confirmation bias have attracted most attention (46.9%). Researchers are most interested in specific disease/illness (35%) and the health factors of consumer products (17.5%). For theoretical presence, about one-third of the reviewed articles have cited behavioral economist Daniel Kahneman, although most of the references are the early works of Kahneman.Research limitations/implicationsAs an emerging research area, there exists plenty of cognitive biases to be investigated in the context of health information seeking. In the meantime, the adoption of more recent theoretical insights such as nudge for debiasing may enrich this research area. Health communication scientists may find incorporating the behavioral decision research framework enriches the disciplinary inquiry of health information seeking, while information scientists could use it to commence the cognitive turn of information science evolution.Originality/valueThrough evidence-based understanding, this review shows the potential research directions that health communication scientists and information scientists could contribute to optimize health decisions through the adoption of behavioral decision research framework.

Ambivalence in Political Decision Making

Behavioral research largely treats attitudinal ambivalence as a component of attitude strength. Specifically, attitudinal ambivalence exists when someone simultaneously possesses positive and negative evaluations of a single attitude object. Ambivalent individuals do not have a single “true” attitude about political issues but rather a store of multiple and sometimes conflicting attitudes that they might draw upon at any given time when making a decision. Research has suggested that such ambivalence is quite common when it comes to political attitudes. Thus, understanding the measurement of ambivalence, the sources of ambivalence, and the consequences of ambivalence is critical to understanding political decision making. Ambivalence measures largely fall within one of two types: Meta-attitudinal measures where individuals assess their own ambivalence and operative measures where researchers construct indicators that assess ambivalence without individuals’ cognizance that it is being measured. Most research suggests that operative measures perform better. Research generally assumes that the causes of ambivalence are rooted in individual differences in attitude strength that may result from a host of individual or combined sources. The most common sources of ambivalence researchers focus on are value conflict, differences in political knowledge, Context/Political Environment, and Cross-Cutting Information/Conflicting Networks/Groups. Finally, some of the most prevalent consequences of ambivalence are an increase in susceptibility to influence, an effect on the rate of political participation, and increased variance in vote choice. It is here, in the consequences of ambivalence, where the most direct connection to political decision making is evident. In a democratic society, the decision centered on for whom one votes, is perhaps, the quintessential political decision.