IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v6y2011i1p7-22_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Threshold models of recognition and the recognition heuristic

Author

Listed:
  • Erdfelder, Edgar
  • Küpper-Tetzel, Carolina E.
  • Mattern, Sandra D.

Abstract

According to the recognition heuristic (RH) theory, decisions follow the recognition principle: Given a high validity of the recognition cue, people should prefer recognized choice options compared to unrecognized ones. Assuming that the memory strength of choice options is strongly correlated with both the choice criterion and recognition judgments, the RH is a reasonable strategy that approximates optimal decisions with a minimum of cognitive effort (Davis-Stober, Dana, & Budescu, 2010). However, theories of recognition memory are not generally compatible with this assumption. For example, some threshold models of recognition presume that recognition judgments can arise from two types of cognitive states: (1) certainty states in which judgments are almost perfectly correlated with memory strength and (2) uncertainty states in which recognition judgments reflect guessing rather than differences in memory strength. We report an experiment designed to test the prediction that the RH applies to certainty states only. Our results show that memory states rather than recognition judgments affect use of recognition information in binary decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Erdfelder, Edgar & Küpper-Tetzel, Carolina E. & Mattern, Sandra D., 2011. "Threshold models of recognition and the recognition heuristic," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 7-22, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:1:p:7-22_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500002060/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:1:p:7-22_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.