Journal
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION
Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages 867-889Publisher
AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/a0015501
Keywords
decision making; simple heuristics; multiple cue judgments; quantitative estimation
Categories
Funding
- International Max Planck Research School LIFE [R1 1226/5]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The cognitive processes underlying quantitative estimations vary. Past research has identified task-contingent changes between rule-based and exemplar-based processes (P. Juslin, L. Karlsson, & H. Olsson, 2008). B. von Helversen and J. Rieskamp (2008), however, proposed a simple rule-based model-the mapping model-that outperformed the exemplar model in a task thought to promote exemplar-based processing. This raised questions about the assumptions of rule-based versus exemplar-based models that underlie the notion of task contingency of cognitive processes. Rule-based models, such as the mapping model, assume the abstraction of explicit task knowledge. In contrast, exemplar models should profit if storage and activation of the exemplars is facilitated. Two studies tested the importance of the two models' assumptions. When knowledge about cues existed, the rule-based mapping model predicted quantitative estimations best. In contrast, when knowledge about the cues was difficult to gain, participants' estimations were best described by an exemplar model. The results emphasize the task contingency of cognitive processes.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available