Physiological arousal in processing recognition information

15 Pages·2010·0.15 MB·English

JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010,pp.285–299
Physiological arousal in processing recognition information:
Ignoring or integrating cognitive cues?
GuyHochman∗ ShaharAyal
Technion—IsraelInstituteofTechnology DukeUniversity
AndreasGlöckner
MaxPlanckInstituteforResearchonCollectiveGoods
Abstract
The recognition heuristic (RH; Goldstein & Gigerenzer, 2002) suggests that, when applicable, probabilistic infer-
encesarebasedonanoncompensatoryexaminationofwhetheranobjectisrecognizedornot. Theoverallfindingson
theprocessesthatunderliethisfastandfrugalheuristicaresomewhatmixed,andmanystudieshaveexpressedtheneed
forconsideringamorecompensatoryintegrationofrecognitioninformation. Regardlessofthemechanisminvolved,it
isclearthatrecognitionhasastronginfluenceonchoices,andthisfindingmightbeexplainedbythefactthatrecog-
nitioncuesarouseaffectandthusreceivemoreattentionthancognitivecues. Totestthisassumption,weinvestigated
whetherrecognitionresultsinadirectaffectivesignalbymeasuringphysiologicalarousal(i.e.,peripheralarterialtone)
in the established city-size task. We found that recognition of cities does not directly result in increased physiolog-
ical arousal. Moreover, the results show that physiological arousal increased with increasing inconsistency between
recognitioninformationandadditionalcueinformation. Thesefindingssupportpredictionsderivedbyacompensatory
ParallelConstraintSatisfactionmodelratherthanpredictionsofnoncompensatorymodels. Additionalresultsconcern-
ingconfidenceratings, responsetimes, andchoiceproportionsfurtherdemonstratedthatrecognitioninformationand
othercognitivecuesareintegratedinacompensatorymanner.
Keywords:affect,recognitionheuristic,physiologicalarousal,parallelconstraintsatisfaction,noncompensatorymodels.
1 Introduction
typical tools in this toolbox, suggests that probabilistic
inferences about a specific criterion (e.g., which of two
Imagine a business trip to a city you have never visited citiesismorepopulated),aremadeonthebasisofrecog-
before. Your meetings end later than you had expected nitionalone,sothatrecognizedobjects(e.g.,thenameof
andyoudecidetospendthenight.Youmakeafewphone thecity)willbechosenoverunrecognizedones.
callsandfindtwohotelswithvacancies,bothatasimilar Indeed, it has been shown repeatedly that people ac-
rate. Youknownothingelseaboutthesehotels;however, tuallypreferrecognizedobjectsoverunrecognizedones,
youdorecognizethenameofoneofthem. Whichhotel and that such behavior may lead to rather accurate in-
wouldyouchoose? AccordingtoGoldsteinandGigeren- ferences (e.g., Borges, Goldstein, Ortmann, & Gigeren-
zer (1999; 2002), these kinds of probabilistic inferences zer, 1999; Goldstein & Gigerenzer, 1999, 2002; Pachur
couldberesolvedbyrecognitioninformationalone. & Biele, 2007; Pohl, 2006; Reimer & Katsikopoulos,
More specifically, according to Gigerenzer and col- 2004;Serwe&Frings,2006). Nevertheless,severalstud-
leagues (Gigerenzer, 2000; Gigerenzer & Goldstein, ies challenge the claim that recognition information is
1996; Gigerenzer, Todd et al., 1999), individuals are used in a noncompensatory manner1 as predicted by the
equipped with several tools (i.e., fast and frugal heuris- RH(e.g., Bröder&Eichler, 2006; Hilbig&Pohl, 2008;
tics) that exploit the structure of the environment, some McCloy & Beaman, 2004; Newell & Fernandez, 2006;
of which rely solely on one piece of information at a
timeontheroadtoreachingadecision. Therecognition 1Noncompensatorystrategiessuggestthatdifferentcuesorattributes
ofthechoicealternativeareconsideredinaspecificorder,usuallyin
heuristic (RH), the simplest and one of the most proto-
theorderoftheirvalidityorimportance(e.g.,thetakethebestheuristic,
TTB).Onlyonepieceofinformationisbeingevaluatedatatimeand
∗Address:GuyHochman,MaxWertheimerMinervaCenterforCog- cuescannotcompensatefordeficitsinotherscues. Incontrast,com-
nitive Studies, Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, pensatorystrategiesassumethatchoicesarebasedontheintegrationof
TheTechnion-IsraelInstituteofTechnology, Haifa, Israel. E-mail: theavailableinformation.Thus,compensationbetweencuesispossible
[email protected]. (e.g.,theExpectedUtilityTheory—EUT).
285
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 286
Newell & Shanks, 2004; Oppenheimer, 2003; Pachur, —akintoperception(Holyoak&Simon,1999;McClel-
Bröder&Marewski,2008; Richter&Späth, 2006). For land&Rumelhart,1981;Read,Vanman,&Miller,1997;
example, in Oppenheimer (2003), Bröder and Eichler Thagard,1989)—bywhichconsistentinterpretationsof
(2006), and Richter and Späth (2006), additional infor- decision tasks are constructed. Available information is
mationhasbeenfoundtoaffecttheproportionofchoices taken into account according to its importance, and the
thatfollowedrecognition. Whileithasbeenarguedthat advantages of the (emerging) preferred option are high-
several of these studies suffer from methodological lim- lighted by systematic information distortions (see also
itations(seePachuretal., 2008), theirfindingsnonethe- Russo, Carlson, Meloy, & Yong, 2008). Theformalized
less highlight the need for considering a more compen- PCSmodelincludesfourpossiblesteps. First,whenpre-
satoryintegrationofrecognitioninformation. sented with a decision task, related information is acti-
Moreover, studies on the RH have focused mainly vatedtoformamentalrepresentationofthetask.Second,
on choice behavior. Yet, since the choice predictions automaticprocessesofPCSleadtomaximizationofcon-
made by different models often overlap (see Ayal & sistency by automatically highlighting information sup-
Hochman, 2009; Glöckner & Betsch, 2008a), it is dif- portingthefavoredalternativeandatthesametimesup-
ficult to draw clear conclusions concerning the underly- pressingcontradictinginformation. Asaresult,aconsis-
ing cognitive processes. Several recent studies have at- tentrepresentationoftheavailableinformationisformed.
tempted to address this problem, for example by testing Third, the decision maker evaluates the choice alterna-
hypothesesconcerningprocessmeasuressuchasdecision tives, and if one alternative clearly dominates the other
time(Hilbig&Pohl,2008;2009;Marewski,Gaissmaier, (i.e.,ifthereisenoughinformationinfavorofthisalter-
Schooler, Goldstein, & Gigerenzer, 2010), and by addi- native), this alternative is chosen. However, if informa-
tionallyinvestigatingconfidence(Glöckner&Bröder,in tionconsistencyfailstoreachacertainthreshold,thede-
press). Yet, additional research is needed to disentangle cisionmakertakesaforthstep, inwhichdeliberatecon-
theroleofrecognitioninformationindecisionmaking,as struction processes are activated to change the structure
wellastoexaminethecognitiveprocessesunderlyingits ofthenetwork(e.g.,changingthepatternofinformation
useininferencesandchoicebehavior. search,assigningdifferentweightstothedifferentpieces
To achieve these goals, we investigated the nature of of information). Among other things, the PCS model is
the processes underlying the use of recognition infor- supportedbyresearchthatshowsthatunconsciousmod-
mation in probabilistic inferences, using physiological ificationsoftheavailableinformationoccurduringdeci-
arousal, choice proportions, decision times, and confi- sion processes (e.g., Glöckner, Betsch, & Schindler, in
dence as dependent measures. We derived concurring press; Holyoak&Simon, 1999; Simon, Krawczyk, Ble-
predictions on the basis of a noncompensatory perspec- icher, & Holyoak, 2008; Simon, Snow, & Read, 2004).
tive, and juxtapose these with contradicting predictions Furthermore, PCS models have been found to account
derivedfromacompensatorymodel. Specifically,wein- well for both choices and decision times in probabilis-
vestigate whether recognition leads to increased physio- ticinferencetasks(Glöckner,2008;Glöckner&Hodges,
logical arousal, which dominates other cognitive infor- inpress;Glöckner&Bröder,inpress;seealsoGlöckner
mation, as suggested by affect-based noncompensatory &Betsch,2008c).
models(e.g.,Damasio,1994;Slovic,Finucane,Peters,&
MacGregor, 2002). It has been argued that recognition
1.1 Overviewofthestudy
information,likeotheraffectivesignals,mightbegener-
ated automatically (Pachur & Hertwig, 2006), and that Thecurrentstudyisdesignedtoexaminewhetherrecog-
itmayoverridecognitiveinformation(e.g., Goldstein& nition information is integrated with other information
Gigerenzer,2002,Experiment2;Pachuretal.,2008,Ex- in a compensatory or noncompensatory manner, and
periment1). Thus,weexaminedwhetherrecognitionin- whether recognition information is encoded as a special
formationisaffectivelyencodedduringthedecisionpro- affective signal. To do so, we examined choice behav-
cess. ior, while participants conducted a city-size task (Gold-
We tested the RH against the compensatory Parallel stein & Gigerenzer, 2002; Richter & Späth, 2006). The
Constraint Satisfaction (PCS) model for decision mak- city-size task was chosen in order to create an optimal
ing (e.g., Glöckner & Betsch, 2008b). The PCS model environment for using the RH. Specifically, in this task
was selected because it has been shown to account well thecriterion(i.e.,populationsize)isnotimmediatelyac-
fordecisiontimes(Hilbig&Pohl,2009)andconfidence cessible, and inference has to be based on probabilistic
(Glöckner & Bröder, in press) in recognition tasks, and cues(Goldstein&Gigerenzer,2002;Pachuretal.,2008).
because it makes specific predictions concerning physi- Inaddition,recognitionisnaturalratherthanexperimen-
ologicalarousal. ThePCSmodelassumesthatinforma- tallyinduced,anditishighlycorrelatedwiththecriterion
tionintegrationisbasedonautomatic-intuitiveprocesses (Pachur et al., 2008). The selection of this task ensures,
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 287
accordingtoproponentsoftheRH,thatparticipantswill theotheroneisnot(e.g.,shampooB),butwhenlooking
use the RH and allows us to focus on the processes that at them on a supermarket shelf additional probabilistic
underlietheadoptionofthisheuristic. cuesbecomeimmediatelyavailable. Suchcuesmightin-
Importantly,inordertothoroughlyinvestigatethecog- cluderecommendationsofproducttestingagencies,eco-
nitive processes underlying the use of recognition infor- labels,sizeandcolorofthepackage,etc. Thus,inmany
mation, two major methodological considerations must real-lifesituations,accountingforexternalinformationis
betakenintoaccount. First,choicepredictionsofdiffer- inherentintheevaluationofrecognitioninformation. In
ent models may overlap, and thus multiple means of in- thecurrentpaperweaimedtocapturethesekindsofsit-
vestigationareinorder(Ayal&Hochman,2009;Glöck- uations,andtoshedlightontheprocessesunderlyingthe
ner, 2009, Glöckner & Bröder, in press; for a choice- evaluationofrecognitionandadditionallyavailableinfor-
basedapproachseealsoMarewskietal.,inpress). Here mation.
we look at choice patterns, response times, and confi-
dencelevel. Inaddition,wefocusonautonomicnervous 1.2 Indirect measures of processes and hy-
systemarousal,whichisknowntoaccompanyemotional
potheses
responsestopsychologicalstimuli(Andreassi,2000;An-
noni, Ptak, Caldara-Schnetzer, Khateb, & Pollermann, 1.2.1 Choiceproportion
2003; Cacioppo, Tassinary, & Berntson, 2007), serving
Choiceproportionreferstotheproportionofindividuals’
asaphysiologicalmarkerofbehavioralresponses(Sokol-
choicesthatareconsistentwiththepredictionsofaspe-
Hessneretal.,2009). Tomeasureemotionalarousal,we
cificdecisionmodel(alsoknownasadherencerates). If
usedPeripheralArterialTone(PAT)atthefingertip. For
choice tasks are diagnostic (i.e., if the different models
further information on the PAT measure, see Hochman,
predictdifferentchoices),thenthismeasurecanbeused
Glöckner,andYechiam(2010).
asanindicatoroftheunderlyingprocessesthatleadtothe
Second,tocontrastpredictionsfromdifferentmodels,
decision(Bröder&Schiffer,2003;foradiscussionofthe
asufficientnumberofdiagnosticcases(inwhichthecon-
problemsthatmightresultfromusingchoiceproportions
sideredmodelshavecontradictingpredictions)shouldbe
aspredictorforstrategyuseseealsoHilbig,inpress).
included (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008a). In the current
According to the RH, recognition information is used
study, several trials will include additional information
inanoncompensatorymanner. Thus,ifamajorityofpar-
(in the form of dichotomous cues), which will be ei-
ticipantsappliesRHitwouldbepredictedthatahighpro-
ther congruent or incongruent with the naturally avail-
portionof choices followsrecognition in cases in which
ablerecognitioninformation(pointinginthesameorthe
it is diagnostic (i.e., one option is recognized and the
opposite direction, respectively).2 By focusing on trials
other is not). In addition, this choice proportion should
inwhichonlyrecognitioninformationisavailableversus
be insensitive to the presence of additional information,
trialsinwhichadditionalcongruentorincongruentinfor-
whether this additional information is congruent or in-
mation is presented, we were able to create a sufficient
congruent with recognition. In contrast, the PCS model
numberofsuchdiagnosticcases.
(as well as other compensatory models) assumes that
Thus, our methodological design enables us to juxta-
allavailableinformationisintegratedinacompensatory
pose contradicting predictions about the compensatory
manner. Thus, thePCSmodelpredictshighproportions
andnoncompensatoryuseofrecognitioninformation.By
ofchoiceinlinewithrecognitionwhenrecognitioninfor-
providingfurtherinformationaboutthecities,wedeviate
mation and the additional cue are congruent. However,
from the original domain of choices for which the RH
when only recognition information is available, choice
was suggested, namely to account for inferences from
proportionwillbelower,andlowestyetifrecognitionin-
memory.Note,however,thatinferencesthatincludeboth
formation and the additional cue are incongruent. Since
given information and information retrieved from mem-
previousresearchsupportsacompensatoryintegrationof
ory are rather common and highly relevant in everyday
recognition information and further cues (i.e., the PCS
life (for a similar approach see Glöckner & Bröder, in
hypothesis),weexpectedtoreplicatethesefindings.
press). Consider, for example, a consumer decision to
buyashampoo.Oneproductisknown(e.g.,shampooA),
1.2.2 Responsetime
2Itshouldbenotedthattheuseofinducedknowledgemayhighlight
Response time refers to the time it takes the decision
theadditionalinformationandthuscanpotentiallyincreaseitsusein
thedecisionprocess(seePachuretal., 2008). Toallowforastrong makertocontemplatebeforemakingherdecision. Short
testandtominimizethepotentialimpactofdemandeffects,theaddi- decision latencies are assumed to reflect short process-
tionalcueinformationhadlowvalidity(whichwasmuchlowerthanthe ingtimeandrelianceoninstantlyaccessibleinformation,
validityofrecognitioninformation). Furthermore,wetriedtosupport
whilelongdecisionlatenciesreflectmoredeliberatecog-
participants’comprehensionbyexplainingthatthevalidityofthecues
isonlysomewhathigherthanchancelevel. nitive consideration (Ayal & Hochman, 2009; Betsch,
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 288
2008;Horstmann,Ahlgrimm,&Glöckner,2009;Payne, ableinformationandontheresultsofintegrationofvar-
Bettman,&Johnson,1993). ious cues (e.g., Ayal & Hochman, 2009; Erev, Wallsten,
Since the recognition information used in the current & Budescu, 1994). Specifically, confidence level is as-
study is natural, it is assumed to be instantly accessible sumedtodependontheperceiveddifferencebetweenthe
(Pachur & Hertwig, 2006). Thus, the RH (in the imple- alternatives (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008c). Accordingly,
mentation suggested by Gigerenzer & Goldstein, 1996) thePCSmodelpredictsthatconfidencelevelwillbehigh-
predicts short response times on those cases in which estwhenallinformationpointstowardselectingthesame
the recognition information is diagnostic. In addition, option,andlowestwhentherecognitioninformationand
sincethisnoncompensatorymodelpredictsthatrecogni- theadditionalinformationareincongruent.Whenlessin-
tion is the only information to be considered, this short formationisavailable(e.g.,onlyrecognition),confidence
responsetimeshouldnotbeaffectedbyadditional(con- level is predicted to be intermediate. Based on findings
gruent and incongruent) cue information. By contrast, in probabilistic inference tasks (Glöckner & Hodges, in
the PCS model suggests that all available information press)andrecentfindingsinrecognitionbasedprobabilis-
is automatically integrated to form a mental representa- ticinferences(Glöckner&Bröder,inpress),weexpectto
tion. Responsetimeshouldbeshorterwhenconsistency findsupportforthePCShypothesiswiththismeasureas
ishigh,becauseonealternativeismoreclearlysupported well.
and thus selected more quickly (for a similar prediction
see Bergert & Nosofsky, 2007). Thus, response time
1.2.4 Physiologicalarousal
shouldbeshortestwhenbothavailablepiecesofinforma-
tion (i.e., recognition and cue) are congruent. Response Thesympatheticbranchoftheautonomicnervoussystem
time should increase when only recognition information is responsible for mobilizing bodily resources to allow
is available (since the advantage of the preferred alter- theregulationandcoordinationofemotionalresponsesto
nativeislessobvious). Finally, responsetimeshouldbe psychologicalstimuli(Andreassi, 2000). PATatthefin-
longestwhenincongruentinformationispresented. Note gertips represents changes in blood volume in response
thatHilbigandPohl(2009)haverecentlyprovidedcon- to environmental stimuli (Andreassi, 2000), and is con-
vincingevidenceforthedecisiontimepredictionsofthe sidered a good measure of sympathetic autonomic sys-
PCS models (and decision field theory; Busemeyer & temactivation(Lavie,Schnall,Sheffy,&Shlitner,2000).
Townsend, 1993) and we expect to replicate their find- Thelevelofsympatheticactivationisindicatedbyade-
ings. crease in the transparency of the blood as a function of
bloodpressure. Foreachheartbeat,bloodpressurevaries
betweensystolicanddiastolicpressures. Thesystolicar-
1.2.3 Confidencelevel
terialpressureisdefinedasthepeakpressureinthearter-
The confidence level reflects how confident a decision ies,whichoccursnearthebeginningofthecardiaccycle
makerisaboutherinference. Accordingtothenoncom- (whentheheartconstricts);thediastolicarterialpressure
pensatory principles, decisions are based solely on the isthelowestpressure(attherestingphaseofthecardiac
first diagnostic piece of information (e.g., Gigerenzer et cycle) (Klabunde, 2005). PAT is the difference between
al.,1999).Assumingthatcuesareinvestigatedinorderof the maximum and minimum pressures measured. PAT
theirvalidity,decisionsshouldbebasedonthemostvalid has been successfully validated by showing high corre-
diagnosticcue. Recognitioninformationhashighnatural lations with cortical arousal (Penzel, Fricke, Jerrentrup,
validityinseveralsituations(e.g., Goldstein&Gigeren- Peter,&Vogelmeier,2002).
zer, 2002; Pachuretal., 2008), andisassumedtobethe Affective responses in humans are accompanied by
first step in a number of fast and frugal strategies, such increased sympathetic activation, indexed by vasocon-
as the take-the-best heuristic (Gigerenzer & Goldstein, striction, i.e., a decreased PAT signal. Thus, autonomic
1996). Thus, decisionsthatarebasedonrecognitionin- arousal, as indexed by PAT, can be used to examine the
formation alone should lead to a high confidence level wayinwhichrecognitioninformationisbeingtreatedand
whichisassumedtobeequaltothevalidityoftherecog- integratedduringthedecisionprocess.
nition cue (Gigerenzer, Hoffrage, & Kleinbölting, 1991; In particular, if recognition represents a natural affec-
seealsoAyal&Hochman,2009). Furthermore,sincethe tivesignal, thenweshouldexpectanincreaseinarousal
processinthesediagnosticrecognitioncasesisassumed inresponsetorecognizedstimulirelativetounrecognized
tobenoncompensatory(i.e.,basedonlyonthediscrimi- information.Regardlessofwhetherrecognitionactsasan
natinginformationofrecognition),thishighlevelofcon- affective signal, according to the noncompensatory per-
fidenceshouldnotbeaffectedbyadditionalinformation. spective,whenrecognitiondifferentiatesbetweentwoal-
On the other hand, compensatory principles suggest ternatives,nochangesinarousalshouldbeexpectedwith
thatconfidenceestimationsshouldbebasedonallavail- the presentation of additional information, whether this
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 289
Table1: CompetingpredictionsoftheRHandPCSmodelsforeachofthemeasuresusedinthecurrentstudy.
Measure RHpredictions PCSpredictions
Choice Choiceproportionalignedwiththe Choiceproportionsfollowingrecognitionwillbe
proportion recognizedoptionwillbehigh,andwill highestforadditionalcongruentinformation,and
notbeaffectedbyadditional lowestforincongruentinformation. Intermediate
information,whetherthisinformationis choiceproportionsareexpectedwhenonly
congruentorincongruentwith recognitioninformationisavailable.
recognitioninformation.
Responsetime Responsetimewillbefastifrecognition Responsetimewillbeshortestforadditional
informationclearlyfavorsonechoice informationcongruentwithrecognition
overanother,andshouldnotbeaffected informationandlongestforincongruent
byadditionalinformation,whether information. Intermediateresponsetimeis
congruentorincongruentwith expectedwhenonlyrecognitioninformationis
recognitioninformation. available.
Confidencelevel Confidencelevelwillbehighif Confidencelevelwillbehighestforadditional
recognitioninformationisavailable,and informationcongruentwithrecognition
shouldnotbeaffectedbyadditional informationandlowestforincongruent
information,whethercongruentor information. Intermediateconfidencelevelis
incongruentwithrecognition expectedwhenonlyrecognitioninformationis
information. available.
Physiological Recognizedcitynameswillbe Physiologicalarousalwillbelowerforcongruent
arousal associatedwithincreasedphysiological informationrelativetoincongruentinformation,
arousalrelativetounrecognizedcity reflectingincreasedsensitivitytolowconsistency
names.∗Inaddition,physiological versushighconsistency.
arousalwillnotbeaffectedby
additionalinformation,whether
congruentorincongruentwith
recognitioninformation.
∗NotethatthispredictionisnotdirectlyderivedfromtheoriginalRH-specificationofGoldsteinandGigeren-
zer (1999; 2002). Rather, it represents a proposition put forward in the current study to examine whether
recognitioninformationcreatesanaffectivesignalfavoringoneoptionthatdominatesallotherinformation.
information is congruent or incongruent with the recog- Predictions concerning all dependent variables are
nitioninformation. summarizedinTable1.
By contrast, if recognition takes no precedence over
other cognitive cues, and is integrated with other infor-
mation, then autonomic arousal should not depend on
recognition alone. According to the PCS model, physi- 2 Method
ologicalarousalshouldbedependentontheconsistency
(vs.conflict)amongallavailablecueinformation(Glöck-
ner&Hochman,inpress). Hence,itshouldbehighestin 2.1 Participants
low consistency situations (i.e., when recognition infor-
mationandtheadditionalcueareincongruent),andlow- Twenty-four undergraduates (10 females; mean age =
estinhighconsistencysituations(i.e.,whenbothtypesof 24.0 years, SD = 2.1) from the Technion — Israel In-
informationarecongruent). Thecurrentstudyisthefirst stitute of Technology served as paid participants in the
to investigate the relation between recognition informa- experiment. They received a flat fee of 80 NIS (approx.
tion and physiological arousal in probabilistic inference $21) and had a chance to get an extra bonus of 50 NIS
tasks,andthisisthemaincontributionofthiswork. (approx. $13)dependingontheirperformance.
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 290
Table2: Citiesusedintheexperiment. 2.4 Designandprocedure
Recognizedcities Unrecognizedcities
Participants were presented with the 190 pairs of cities,
Sacramento Raleigh
and were asked to choose the city with the larger pop-
Honolulu Plano ulation in each pair. No feedback was provided after
Buffalo Greensboro choice. A confidence measure appeared right after each
selection,andparticipantswererequiredtostatehowcer-
NewOrleans BatonRouge
taintheywereabouttheirchoice(onascalefrom50%to
Orlando Amarillo
100%,in10%intervals).Reactiontimewasmeasuredby
SaltLakeCity Topeka
acomputerprogram,startingfromtheonsetofeachpair
Hollywood Lansing ofcitiesuntilthechoiceresponse.
AnnArbor Harrisburg
In addition, in 91 of the trials (50 in the critical trials
Cambridge JeffersonCity inwhichrecognitiondifferentiated),acueintheformof
Annapolis Juneau a+/-signwaspresented. Thissignconstitutedthemain
within-participantsmanipulation. Onaverage, inhalfof
thecriticaltrials(i.e.,thecongruentcuetrials)thecueled
2.2 Materials
to choosing the recognized city (i.e., a plus sign point-
ing towards the recognized city or minus sign pointing
Apilotstudywasconductedtocreateappropriatemateri-
als. Inthepilotstudy,weassessedtherecognitionrateof toward the unrecognized city) and hence was congruent
48UScitiesbyIsraeliparticipants(N=20).The10most with the recognition cue. In the other half of the trials
recognized cities (> 75%) and the 10 least recognized (i.e., the incongruent cue trials) the cue pointed towards
cities (< 15%) were chosen (see Table 2). A complete selectingtheunrecognizedcity.Hence,theadditionalcue
pair-wisecombinationofcitynamesresultedinasample was presented for recognized and unrecognized cities.
of190pairsthatwereusedintheexperiment. Onehun- Participants were informed that this cue represented the
dred trials were used as the critical trials, in which we prediction of a geography student, who makes a correct
expected that participants would recognize one city, but prediction about the city with the larger population in
nottheother(althoughtheanalysistookintoaccountac-
6 out of 10 cases. This reported validity was obtained
tualrecognitionratesforeachparticipant). Theother90
in the experimental manipulation; namely the additional
trialswereusedasfillertrialsthatweredesignedtomask
cuewascorrectin60%ofthetrials. Toensurethatpar-
thepurposeoftheexperiment(i.e.,trialsinwhichrecog-
ticipantsrealizedthatthecuesignifiedlowvalidity,they
nition does not differentiate between options). Because
werefurtherinformedthatavalidityof50%inthistask
wewereinterestedintheinfluenceoftherecognitioncue
(i.e., 5 out of 10 correct) is equivalent to chance level.
alone, weselectedcitiessothattwoadditionalcuesthat
Half of the cues presented a minus sign, and the other
mightbe potentiallyused were balanced. That is, inthe
half presented a plus sign. Similarly, half of the minus
recognizedandunrecognizedsamplethenumberofstate
signs were adjacent to the recognized city and the other
capital cities and the number of cities with universities
were equal. In addition, all cities had medium to small halfwasassociatedwiththeothercity,andthesamewas
population(rangingfrom30,000to460,000),inorderto true for the plus signs. Each participant saw all trials,
avoidceilingeffectsoffamiliarity. eachinadifferentrandom order. Tomotivategoodper-
formance,abonusof50NISwasofferedtothosewhose
successratewashigherthan75%(acrossalltrials).
2.3 PATdataacquisition
Importantly,the20citieswerepresentedseparatelyin
PAT data were obtained using the SitePAT-200 (Ita-
a different test, and for each city participants were re-
mar Medical Ltd., Keisaria, Israel), a photo-cell sensor
quired to state whether they recognize it or not. Half of
plethysmograph,shapedasafingercup,whichisplaced
the participants were given this recognition test prior to
attheendofthefirstfingerofthenon-dominanthand(see
thecity-sizetask,andtheotherhalfreceiveditaftercom-
Karasik et al., 2002). The participant’s non-dominant
hand was fixed on a hand rest during the whole ses- pletion of the city-size task. Since order turned out to
sion. Therateofdataacquisitionwas100Hz, averaged have no effect, the data were collapsed across these ex-
to 1 sample per second. Autonomic activity associated perimental conditions. The inter-trial interval was set to
with arterial constriction (which indicates arousal) leads 7 seconds in both phases, so as to minimize residual ef-
tolowervaluesonthePATmeasure(expressedbyvolts). fectsofpriorphysiologicalresponses.
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 291
RH makes no specific predictions about cases in which
Figure 1: Mean choice proportions as a function of the
bothcitiesarerecognizedorunrecognized,3RTandcon-
typeofinformationavailablebesidesrecognition.
fidencelevelshouldstillsystematicallydiffertocasesin
0
1. whichinspectingrecognitioninformationaloneinstantly
leadstoadecision. Morespecifically, whenotherinfor-
9 mation than recognition has to be considered, we gen-
n 0.
o erally expect a slower reaction time and a lower level
ecogniti 0.8 obfyctohnefifidnendcineg.sI.ndWeehde,nthreesceogpnreitdiiocntiownasswneortedsiuapgpnoorstteidc
d r (i.e., both cities are known) or not available (i.e., both
owe 0.7 cities are unknown), average response time across par-
s foll ticipantswas9.03seconds(SD=0.93). Responsetimes
oice 0.6 dropped to 8.48 seconds (SD = 0.88) when recognition
h information differentiated between options. A within-
c
% 5 subjectrepeatedmeasuresANOVArevealedthatthisdif-
0.
ference was significant [F (1, 23) = 15.781, p = 0.001].
Asimilarpatternofresultswasfoundforconfidencerat-
4
0. ings.Namely,whenrecognitionwasnotdiagnosticorun-
No cue Congruent cue Incongruent cue
available, the average confidence level was 60.42% (SD
= 6.4). Confidence level increased to 66.3% (SD = 9.4)
3 Results whenrecognitioninformationdifferentiatedbetweenop-
tions. A within-subject repeated measures ANOVA re-
vealed that this difference was significant [F (1, 23) =
3.1 Recognitionandcuevalidityestimates
19.178,p<0.0001].
On average, participants recognized approximately 9 Taken together, these results support the first part of
cities (SD = 1.5; range 5–12). A one-way analysis of theRHhypothesesaccordingtowhichdiagnosticrecog-
variance (ANOVA) revealed that the order of this task nition information leads to high choice proportions that
(i.e., beforeoraftertheexperimentaltask)hadnoeffect fit the recognition cue, short RT, and a high confidence
onrecognitionranks[F(1,23)=0.259,p=0.616]. This level (see Table 1). The results also support the validity
resultsuggeststhatparticipantswereabletodifferentiate ofourmeasuresinthistask.
theirexperience-basedrecognitionfrommerefamiliarity
with the city names that was induced by repeated expo-
3.2 Choiceproportionanalysis
suretothecitynamesintheexperiment.
The validity of the recognition cue across all critical
The results of the choice proportion analysis are pre-
trials in which only one city was recognized was 77%
sented in Figure 1. As mentioned above, participants’
(SD=12.6%),andsignificantlyabovechancelevel[t(23)
choices followed recognition in, on average, 83.3% of
= 10.724, p < 0.0001 in a one-sample t-test]. This anal-
thecasesinwhichnoinformationotherthanrecognition
ysis confirms the ecological rationality of using the RH
was presented. This proportion increased to 95.1% (SD
in the current study, establishing the task as a fair test
= 6.8%) when a cue congruent with the recognition in-
forexaminingtheprocessesunderlyingtheprocessingof
formationwasintroducedanddecreasedto50.1%(SD=
recognition information. Importantly, the validity of the
26%)whenanincongruentcuewaspresented. Awithin-
recognitioncuewasfarabovethe60%validityofthead-
subjectrepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasconductedtotest
ditional cognitive cue that was provided in some of the
the effect of cue type (i.e., no cue, congruent cue, and
trials(i.e.,informationfromthegeographystudent).
incongruent cue) as the independent variable on choices
Next,weexaminedwhethertheuseofrecognitionin-
which followed recognition as the dependent variable.
formationaffectedchoicebehavior. Todoso, wecalcu-
This analysis revealed a significant main effect of cue
latedtheproportionofchoicesthatfollowedtherecogni-
type [(F (2, 69) = 59.26, p < 0.0001). Post-hoc paired-
tioncue,andcomparedittochancelevel.Aone-sampled
sample analyses demonstrated that the no-cue choices
t-test showed that choices were sensitive to the recogni-
differedsignificantlyfromboththecongruentandthein-
tion cue in the majority of cases in which only recog-
congruent cue choices [t(23) = -4.919, p < 0.0001, and
nition information was available [average = 83.3%; SD
t(23)=7.265,p<0.0001,respectively].
= 13%; t(23) = 12.889, p < 0.0001]. In addition, we
examined whether response times and confidence level 3SincenodifferencewasfoundbetweentheRTsforeitherrecog-
were affected by recognition information. Although the nizedornone-recognizedcitypairs,theseresultswerecollapsed.
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 292
on only one piece of information in a noncompensatory
Figure2:A-Meanresponsetimeasafunctionofthetype
manner. Instead, theresultssuggestthatparticipantsare
of information available besides recognition. B - Mean
sensitive to all information, and base their decisions on
confidencelevelasafunctionofthetypeofinformation
itsintegration.
available besides recognition. Error bars represent stan-
Partially in contrast to previous findings (e.g., Gold-
darderrors.
stein & Gigerenzer, 2002; Pachur et al., 2008), it seems
5
9. A that recognition information was completely overridden
by other information, even when the additional cue was
of low validity and was obtained from a relatively un-
0 known source. In fact, when a cue — with a validity as
c) 9. lowas.60—thatwasincongruentwithrecognitionwas
e
s
e ( presented,iteliminatedtheeffectoftherecognitioncue,
m
so that the proportion of choices following recognition
se ti 8.5 droppedtochancelevel. Thus,inlinewithmostpriorre-
n
po search,thecurrentresultssuggestthatrecognitioninfor-
s
Re mation is only one of several cues that are integrated in
0 acompensatorymanner. Moreimportantly, ourfindings
8. suggest that real experience-based recognition informa-
tionisnotsignificantlystrongerthanevenalowvalidity
cognitivecue.
Finally,assuggestedbypreviousresearch(e.g.,Pachur
No cue Congruent cue Incongruent cue
et al., 2008), individual differences might exists in peo-
2 ple’suseofrecognitioninformationandadditionalcues.
7
Toexaminethisalternativespeculationwecalculated,for
B
each individual, the correlation coefficient between pro-
0
7 portionsofchoicesthatfollowedrecognitionandcondi-
tion (i.e., congruent cue, no cue, and incongruent cue).
%)
el ( 68 The median correlation coefficient between choice and
v conditionacrossparticipantswas–0.95(t(23)=–16.406,
e
e l p < 0.05). Similarly, for 95.6% of the participants the
enc 66 correlationturnedouttobehighlysignificant(p<0.05).
d
nfi Thispatternofindividualresultssupportstheaggregated
o
C 4 results and suggests that choice proportions were high-
6
estwhenacongruentcuewaspresentedandlowestwhen
an incongruent cue was presented even at the individual
2
6 level. Thereby,individualdifferencescannoteasilyserve
as alternative explanation for our results, as there seems
No cue Congruent cue Incongruent cue tobeonlysmallindividualdifferencesintheuseofrecog-
nitioninformationandadditionalcues.
These results replicate previous findings (e.g., Bröder 3.3 Responsetimeanalysis
& Eichler, 2006; Oppenheimer, 2003; Richter & Späth,
2006) and support the qualitative predictions concern- TheanalysisofresponsetimesispresentedinFigure2A.
ing changes in choice proportion derived from the PCS Overall,themeanresponsetimeforcasesinwhichonly
model. Theresultsconflictwithpredictionsderivedfrom one city was recognized was 8.48 seconds (SD = 0.88)
theRH.Specifically, theresultssuggestthatrecognition whennootherinformationwaspresented.Responsetime
information is integrated with additional information in decreased to 8.11 seconds (SD = 0.84) when a congru-
a compensatory manner. The claim that recognition in- ent cue was introduced and increased to 9.14 seconds
formation is used as the only information in a noncom- (SD = 1.32) when an incongruent cue was presented.
pensatorymannerhastoberejected. Moreover,thispat- A within-subject repeated measures ANOVA was con-
tern of results does not even support a weaker interpre- ducted to test the effect of cue type (i.e., no cue, con-
tation of the RH (Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, & Hertwig, gruent cue, and incongruent cue) on response time as
2008),whichassumesthat,whiledecisionmakersevalu- the dependent variable. This analysis revealed a signif-
atealltheavailableinformation,thefinalchoiceisbased icant main effect of cue type [(F (2, 69) = 17.472, p <
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 293
0.0001). Post-hoc paired-sample analyses demonstrated 9.4%)whennootherinformationwaspresented. Confi-
thatresponsetimeswithoutanycuedifferedsignificantly dencelevelincreasedto69.4%(SD=10.1%)whenacon-
fromresponsetimesfollowingboththecongruentandthe gruentcuewasintroducedanddecreasedto64.3%(SD=
incongruent cue [t(23) = 2.692, p = 0.01, and t(23) = – 7.9%)whenanincongruentcuewaspresented.Awithin-
3.136,p=0.005,respectively]. subjectrepeatedmeasuresANOVAwasconductedtotest
Thus,similartothechoiceproportionresults,decision the effect of cue type (i.e., no cue, congruent cue, and
time results support the predictions of the PCS model, incongruent cue) on confidence level as the dependent
replicating findings by Hilbig and Pohl (2009). In line variable. Thisanalysisrevealedasignificantmaineffect
with the predictions of the PCS model, our findings of cue type [(F (2, 69) = 25.361, p < 0.0001). Post-hoc
demonstrate that when cue predictions are incongruent paired-sampleanalysesdemonstratedthattheconfidence
(i.e., when recognition information points at one choice levelintheno-cuechoicesdifferedsignificantlyfromthe
andthecuepointsattheoppositechoice),responsetime confidencelevelofboththecongruentandtheincongru-
isincreased. Furthermore,wefoundsupportforthePCS entcueconditions[t(23)=-4.791,p<0.0001,andt(23)
hypothesis that decision times are decreased if the addi- =2.73,p=0.01,respectively].
tional cognitive cue points in the same direction as the Again, the results support the predictions of the PCS
recognitioncue.Thisfindingisimportantinshowingthat model but not the predictions derived from the RH. In
more information (i.e., the recognition cue + the cogni- particular,ourfindingssuggestthatavailableinformation
tive cue) is processed faster than less information (i.e., isintegratedandthatitaffectsconfidencelevel.Theanal-
recognitioncuealone). Theseeffectsspeakagainstserial ysis of confidence level shows that rather than relying
modelsofinformationintegration(e.g.,Payne,Bettman, solely on recognition information, decision makers con-
&Johnson,1988;seealsoGlöckner&Betsch,2010). siderrecognitiontobejustoneofothercuesthatareinte-
Moreover, ifrecognitioninformationwereconsidered gratedbyacompensatoryprocessonthewaytoreaching
in a noncompensatory manner, when no additional cue adecision.
was presented, response times should have been equal At the individual level, the median correlation coeffi-
to the other two conditions (either congruent or incon- cientbetweenconditionandconfidencelevelacrosspar-
gruent cues) or even shorter. Shorter response times for ticipants was –0.89 (t(23) = –13.599, p < 0.0001), sug-
recognition alone could support a weaker interpretation gesting that confidence level was highest for congruent
ofthenoncompensatoryviewpoint,inwhichallavailable trialsandlowestforincongruenttrials.Similarly,for92%
informationisscannedbutthefinaldecisionisbasedon oftheparticipantsthiscorrelationturnedouttobehighly
thebestcuealone. Insuchcases,decisionmakerswould significant(p<0.0001). Thus, thisresultaddsuptothe
havelessinformationtoevaluateandcouldthusbefaster. choiceproportionsandresponsetimesfindings, andfur-
However,theresultsprovidenosupportforthisweakin- thersupporttheclaimthatthecurrentresultsdonotstem
terpretationofthenoncompensatorymodels. Rather,the from individual differences in the use of recognition in-
patternofresultsareinlinewithPCSmodels,suggesting formation.
that more processing time is required in cases in which
itishardertofindaconsistentmentalrepresentationdue
3.5 Physiologicalarousal
tohighconflict(i.e.,lowconsistency)betweenpiecesof
information.
3.5.1 Emotionalresponsetorecognizedstimuli
Finally,asforchoiceproportions,wecalculated,atthe
individual level, the correlation coefficient between re- To evaluate whether recognition information creates an
sponse time and condition. The median correlation co- affective signal, we compared physiological reaction,
efficientbetweenresponsetimesandconditionwas0.93 measuredforthetaskinwhichparticipantsratedwhether
(t(23)=9.235,p<0.05),suggestingthatattheindividual theyrecognizedthecityornot(forsinglecities). Hence,
level response times were highest for incongruent trials wemeasuredphysiologicalreactioninresponsetorecog-
and shortest for congruent trials. Similarly, for 86% of nized city names versus unrecognized city names. Note
theparticipants,thiscorrelationwashighlysignificant(p thatlowPATmeasuresindicatehigharousal. Ascanbe
< 0.05). Thus, as in choice proportions, this result ex- seen in Figure 3A, there was a slight tendency that rec-
cludesanindividualdifferencesaccountofourdata. ognized cities led to higher arousal, particularly 2 to 4
secondsafterstimulusonset.However,thistendencywas
3.4 Confidencelevelanalysis notstatisticallysignificant. From2secondspriortocity
name presentation to 7 seconds after presentation, there
Theresultsoftheconfidencelevelanalysisarepresented was no significant difference between PAT responses to
inFigure2B.Overall,themeanconfidencelevelforcases the different types of stimuli. Namely, the average al-
inwhichonlyonecitywasrecognizedwas66.3%(SD= phaacrossallwithin-subject(recognizedversusunrecog-
JudgmentandDecisionMaking,Vol.5,No.4,July2010 Physiologicalarousalinprocessingrecognitioninformation 294
0.91 in this analysis, making it unlikely (i.e., beta-error
Figure 3: A — Average PAT scores in response to rec-
= 0.09) that an existing effect was merely not detected
ognized versus unrecognized city names. B — Average
(Faul,Erdfelder,Lang,&Buchner,2007).
PAT scores as a function of information type. Low PAT
Althoughnullhypothesisresultsshouldbeinterpreted
scoresindicatehigharousal.
cautiously, our findings imply that in the current task
recognitioninformationdoesnotseemtocreateanaffec-
8 A tivesignalfavoringtherecognizedcity,oritmaycreatea
7.
veryweaksignalwhichishardtodetect.Thisconclusion
shouldbefurthervalidatedinfutureresearch.
Unrecognized
6
7. Recognized
s)
olt 3.5.2 Physiological response to additional informa-
v
AT ( 7.4 tion
P
To examine physiological response to additional cue in-
2 formation, we compared PAT scores in response to con-
7.
gruent versus incongruent trials.5 As mentioned above,
PAT scores represent vasoconstriction, and low scores
7.0 thereforeindicateincreasedarousal. Ascanbeseenfrom
Figure 3B, arousal was higher in incongruent trials than
−2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
in congruent trials (i.e., lower PAT scores). A within-
Time (relative to city name presentation
subjectrepeatedmeasuresANOVArevealedthatthisdif-
in the recognition task)
ference was significant at one second after the presenta-
tionofinformation[F(1,23)=4.09,p=0.05].
2 B Thus, in line with the PCS model prediction, arousal
8.
Incongruent increased(i.e.,lowerPATscoreswereobtained)withde-
0 Congruent creasing consistency between the available information.
8.
Thearousaldatafurthersuggestthatadditionalinforma-
tion is integrated rather than neglected, as would have
olts) 7.8 been predicted by the RH. Specifically, the increased
v
PAT ( 7.6 acroonussisatlenincyr)e,sbpuotnnseottoincroenspfloicntsinegtoinrefocromgnaittiioonn(iin.efo.,rmloaw-
tion alone, suggests that information is integrated in a
4
7. compensatorymannerandthatrecognitioncuesareused
asoneofseveral(cognitive)cues.
2
7.
4 Discussion
−2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (relative to pair of cities and additional cue
presentation in the city−size task) Thecurrentstudyaimedtoexaminethenatureofrecog-
nition information in human inference tasks, as well as
the integration of such information with additional cog-
nized)repeatedmeasuresANOVAwas0.51(SD=0.25,
nitive cues. In particular, we examined two main re-
range0.18–0.99).4 Wecannot,however,ruleoutthepos-
search questions. First, we tested inferences regarding
sibility that the results might be partially due to the rel-
ativelysmallsizeofoursample. Still, apost-hocpower
5ThePATscoreishighlysensitivetocognitiveload(Iani,Gopher,
analysis(for10citieswithineachgroup,withanassumed Grunwald,&Lavie,2007;Iani,Gopher,&Lavie,2004),whichisas-
correlationofr=0.3betweenobservationsandassuming sumedtoincreaseasthetaskprogresses. Tocontrolforthiseffect,we
asmalleffectoff=0.25)indicatedanexcellentpowerof matchedforeachparticipantthenumberoftrialsineachcondition(con-
gruentandincongruent),sothateachconditionhadthesamenumberof
trialsastheconditionwiththeminimalnumberoftrials(Mean=17
4TheresultsoftherepeatedmeasureANOVAforthedifferencebe- trials).Itshouldbenoted,however,thatwhenweregressedoutthetime
tweenthePATscoreforrecognizedvs.unrecognizedcities2to5sec- trend(i.e.,totaltrials)fromthePATscoresandusedregressionanalysis
ondsafterstimuluspresentationswereF2sec(1,23)=1.941,p=0.18; topredictthePATscorefromthetypeofcue(congruentversusincon-
F3sec (1, 23)=0.933, p=0.34; F4sec (1, 23)=0.727, p=0.40; and gruent)wefoundsimilarpatternofresults,althoughtheeffectofcue
F5sec(1,23)=0.741,p=0.40. (Wedidnotcalculatethetestat1sec typewasonlymarginallysignificant(i.e.,thep-valueofthemodelwas
becausetherewasnodifference,seeFigure3A). 0.055;one-tailedtest).