IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2604.26761.html

Measuring Choice Difficulty

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Chambers
  • Yusufcan Masatolioglu
  • Paulo Natenzon
  • Collin Raymond

Abstract

We provide a theoretical framework to understand how widely used measures of choice difficulty relate. In a binary-option Bayesian expected-utility framework, we show that three measures of difficulty, (i) understanding (ex-ante value), (ii) choice randomness, and (iii) confidence that the chosen option is ex post correct, are, in general, unrelated, and that this result extends to other potential measures like attenuation. We provide intuitive sufficient conditions which align the orders, using both restrictions on Blackwell experiments that capture well known classes (such as logit) and restrictions on payoffs and demonstrate that in psychophysical tasks that pay only for correctness, confidence coincides with understanding. We show willingness-to-accept to switch, when measured in utils, is equivalent to understanding. Our results suggest caution in interpreting measures of choice difficulty as well as the degree of portability between economics and psychophysics experiments

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Chambers & Yusufcan Masatolioglu & Paulo Natenzon & Collin Raymond, 2026. "Measuring Choice Difficulty," Papers 2604.26761, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2604.26761
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.26761
    File Function: Latest version
    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:arx:papers:2604.26761. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.