IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0206724.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Andres Trujillo

Abstract

Little is known about the interplay between affective and cognitive processes of decision making within the bounded rationality perspective, in particular for the debate on adaptive decision making and strategy selection. This gap in the knowledge is particularly important as affect and deliberation may direct preferences in opposite directions. How do decision makers solve such dissonance? In this paper, we address this question by exploring the use of integral affect as a choice heuristic in comparison with and in conjunction to “take the best,” and weighted addition of attributes (WADD). We operationalize theories of reliance on affect in choice through a "Take the emotionally best" algorithm. Its predictive power is experimentally tested against other models, including mixed-sequential cognitive/affective procedures. We find that individual decisions are better predicted by a sequential combination of "Take the emotionally best" and "Take the best" with a slight dominance of the former. Conditions of cognitive/affective ambivalence, low discrimination ability and high complexity provide the cognitive architecture where such blended choice strategies predict decisions more precisely. This implies that reliance on integral affect may precede the use of cognitive cues following an ecological rationality perspective rather than supporting a kind of competition between affect and cognition as implied in current literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Andres Trujillo, 2018. "The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0206724
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206724
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0206724?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hogarth, Robin M. (ed.), 1990. "Insights in Decision Making," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226348551, September.
    2. Bechara, Antoine & Damasio, Antonio R., 2005. "The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 336-372, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    2. Miguel Godinho de Matos & Pedro Ferreira, 2020. "The Effect of Binge-Watching on the Subscription of Video on Demand: Results from Randomized Experiments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1337-1360, December.
    3. Dow Alexander & Dow Sheila C., 2011. "Animal Spirits Revisited," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-25, December.
    4. Da Silva, Sergio, 2009. "Does Macroeconomics Need Microeconomic Foundations?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-11.
    5. Hamelin, Nicolas & Bonelli, Marco I., 2022. "Traders’ anticipatory feelings and traders’ profitability: An exploratory study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    6. Kawagoe, Toshiji & Narita, Yusuke, 2014. "Guilt aversion revisited: An experimental test of a new model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-9.
    7. Adam, Marc T.P. & Astor, Philipp J. & Krämer, Jan, 2016. "Affective Images, Emotion Regulation and Bidding Behavior: An Experiment on the Influence of Competition and Community Emotions in Internet Auctions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 56-69.
    8. Peeta, Srinivas, 2016. "A marginal utility day-to-day traffic evolution model based on one-step strategic thinkingAuthor-Name: He, Xiaozheng," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 237-255.
    9. Kyra L Wiggin & Martin Reimann & Shailendra P Jain & Darren W Dahl & Margaret C Campbell & Paul M Herr, 2019. "Curiosity Tempts Indulgence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(6), pages 1194-1212.
    10. Rengifo, Erick W. & Trifan, Emanuela, 2007. "Investors Facing Risk: Loss Aversion and Wealth Allocation Between Risky and Risk-Free Assets," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 28063, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Timo Ehrig & Jaison Manjaly & Aditya Singh & Shyam Sunder, 2022. "Adaptive Rationality in Strategic Interaction: Do Emotions Regulate Thinking About Others?," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 330-349, December.
    12. Ganguly, Ananda R & Kagel, John H & Moser, Donald V, 2000. "Do Asset Market Prices Reflect Traders' Judgment Biases?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 219-245, May.
    13. Jason Delaney & Sarah Jacobson & Thorsten Moenig, 2020. "Preference discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 694-715, September.
    14. Wayne DeSarbo & Duncan Fong & John Liechty & Jennifer Coupland, 2005. "Evolutionary preference/utility functions: A dynamic perspective," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 179-202, March.
    15. David Drewery & Colleen Nevison & T. Judene Pretti & Lauren Cormier & Sage Barclay & Antoine Pennaforte, 2016. "Examining the influence of selected factors on perceived co-op work term quality from a student perspective," Post-Print hal-02103137, HAL.
    16. Edmonds, Joyce K. & Hruschka, Daniel & Bernard, H. Russell & Sibley, Lynn, 2012. "Women’s social networks and birth attendant decisions: Application of the Network-Episode Model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 452-459.
    17. Trujillo, Carlos A., 2008. "Book essay on Flemming Hansen and Sverre Riis Christensen (2007), Emotions, advertising and consumer choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 982-985, September.
    18. Stephanie Lichtenfeld & Vanessa L Buechner & Markus A Maier & Maria Fernández-Capo, 2015. "Forgive and Forget: Differences between Decisional and Emotional Forgiveness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-11, May.
    19. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    20. Peep F.M. Stalmeier & Thom G.G. Bezembinder, 1999. "The Discrepancy between Risky and Riskless Utilities," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(4), pages 435-447, October.

    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:plo:pone00:0206724. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.