The limited value of precise tests of the recognition heuristic
Abstract
The recognition heuristic models the adaptive use and dominant role of recognition knowledge in judgment under uncertainty. Of the several predictions that the heuristic makes, empirical tests have predominantly focused on the proposed noncompensatory processing of recognition. Some authors have emphasized that the heuristic needs to be scrutinized based on precise tests of the exclusive use of recognition. Although precise tests have clear merits, I critically evaluate the value of such tests as they are currently employed. First, I argue that using precise measures of the exclusive use of recognition has to go beyond showing that the recognition heuristic---like every model---cannot capture reality completely. Second, I illustrate how precise tests based on response times can lead to unsubstantiated conclusions if the fact that the recognition heuristic does not model the recognition judgment itself is ignored. Finally, I highlight two key but so far neglected aspects of the recognition heuristic: (a) the connection between recognition memory and the recognition heuristic; and (b) the mechanisms underlying the adaptive use of recognition.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Article provided by Society for Judgment and Decision Making in its journal Judgment and Decision Making.
Volume (Year): 6 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5 (July)
Pages: 413-422
Contact details of provider:
Related research
Keywords: recognition heuristic; memory; noncompensatory; response times; ecological rationality.;References
References listed on IDEASPlease report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
- Gerd Gigerenzer & Daniel G. Goldstein, 2011. "The recognition heuristic: A decade of research," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(1), pages 100-121, February.
- Onvara Oeusoonthornwattana & David R. Shanks, 2010. "I like what I know: Is recognition a non-compensatory determiner of consumer choice?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(4), pages 310-325, July.
- Clintin P. Davis-Stober & Jason Dana & David V. Budescu, 2010. "Why recognition is rational: Optimality results on single-variable decision rules," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(4), pages 216-229, July.
- Edgar Erdfelder & Carolina E. Kupper-Tetzel & Sandra D. Mattern, 2011. "Threshold models of recognition and the recognition heuristic," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(1), pages 7-22, February.
- Tracy Tomlinson & Julian N. Marewski & Michael Dougherty, 2011. "Four challenges for cognitive research on the recognition heuristic and a call for a research strategy shift," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(1), pages 89-99, February.
- Andreas Glockner & Arndt Broder, 2011. "Processing of recognition information and additional cues: A model-based analysis of choice, confidence, and response time," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(1), pages 23-42, February.
- Benjamin E. Hilbig, 2010. "Precise models deserve precise measures: A methodological dissection," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(4), pages 272-284, July.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Julian N. Marewski & Katja Mehlhorn, 2011. "Using the ACT-R architecture to specify 39 quantitative process models of decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(6), pages 439-519, August.
- Julian N. Marewski & Rudiger F. Pohl & Oliver Vitouch, 2011. "Recognition-based judgments and decisions: What we have learned (so far)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(5), pages 359-380, July.
- Andreas Glockner & Benjamin E. Hilbig, 2011. "Editorial: Methodology in judgment and decision making research," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 705-710, December.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jdm:journl:v:6:y:2011:i:5:p:413-422For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jonathan Baron).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.