Protected Values and Heuristics and Biases Approach Rumen Iliev and Douglas Medin Northwestern University Abstract Protected values, which are values resisting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Variation and regularities in translation: insights from multiple translation corpora Sara Castagnoli (University of Bologna at Forlì – University of Pisa)
Advertisements

Cross Sectional Designs
1 Health Warning! All may not be what it seems! These examples demonstrate both the importance of graphing data before analysing it and the effect of outliers.
1 Intuitive Irrationality: Reasons for Unreason. 2 Epistemology Branch of philosophy focused on how people acquire knowledge about the world Descriptive.
Misconceptions and Fallacies Concerning Probability Assessments.
The Art and Science of Teaching (2007)
© POSbase 2005 The Conjunction Fallacy Please read the following scenario: (by Tversky & Kahneman, 1983)Tversky & Kahneman, 1983 Linda is 31 years old,
Fallacies in Probability Judgment Yuval Shahar M.D., Ph.D. Judgment and Decision Making in Information Systems.
Reasoning What is the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning? What are heuristics, and how do we use them? How do we reason about categories?
Chapter 10 Human Resource Management and Performance: a Review and Research Agenda David E. Guest.
Seminar /workshop on cognitive attainment ppt Dr Charles C. Chan 28 Sept 2001 Dr Charles C. Chan 28 Sept 2001 Assessing APSS Students Learning.
Heuristics and Biases. Normative Model Bayes rule tells you how you should reason with probabilities – it is a normative model But do people reason like.
Meta-analysis & psychotherapy outcome research
Heuristics & Biases. Bayes Rule Prior Beliefs Evidence Posterior Probability.
Thinking: A Key Process for effective learning “The best thing we can do, from the point of view of the brain and learning, is to teach our learners how.
Chapter One: The Science of Psychology
1 In the previous sequence, we were performing what are described as two-sided t tests. These are appropriate when we have no information about the alternative.
Multiple Linear Regression A method for analyzing the effects of several predictor variables concurrently. - Simultaneously - Stepwise Minimizing the squared.
The noted critics Statler and Waldorf. What critical thinking is and why it matters How it can be applied to different academic disciplines What it means.
DR. AHMAD SHAHRUL NIZAM ISHA
How do Sociologists Study Problems?
Good thinking or gut feeling
Chapter 1: Research Methods
Chapter 2 The Research Enterprise in Psychology. Table of Contents The Scientific Approach: A Search for Laws Basic assumption: events are governed by.
Psy B07 Chapter 4Slide 1 SAMPLING DISTRIBUTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS TESTING.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK and Hypothesis Development
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc LEARNING GOAL Interpret and carry out hypothesis tests for independence of variables with data organized.
Sacred values & consequentialism Will Bennis Northwestern University Department of Psychology MURI Meeting, 1/27/2007.
FIN 614: Financial Management Larry Schrenk, Instructor.
1.  Interpretation refers to the task of drawing inferences from the collected facts after an analytical and/or experimental study.  The task of interpretation.
Past research in decision making has shown that when solving certain types of probability estimation problems, groups tend to exacerbate errors commonly.
Theories and Hypotheses. Assumptions of science A true physical universe exists Order through cause and effect, the connections can be discovered Knowledge.
Agresti/Franklin Statistics, 1 of 88 Chapter 11 Analyzing Association Between Quantitative Variables: Regression Analysis Learn…. To use regression analysis.
The Practice of Statistics, 5th Edition Starnes, Tabor, Yates, Moore Bedford Freeman Worth Publishers CHAPTER 4 Designing Studies 4.2Experiments.
Applied Quantitative Analysis and Practices LECTURE#31 By Dr. Osman Sadiq Paracha.
Experimentation in Computer Science (Part 2). Experimentation in Software Engineering --- Outline  Empirical Strategies  Measurement  Experiment Process.
Personally Important Posttraumatic Growth as a Predictor of Self-Esteem in Adolescents Leah McDiarmid, Kanako Taku Ph.D., & Aundreah Walenski Presented.
Exercise 2-6: Ecological fallacy. Exercise 2-7: Regression artefact: Lord’s paradox.
Representativeness Heuristic Then: Framing Effects Psychology 355: Cognitive Psychology Instructor: John Miyamoto 6/2 /2015: Lecture 10-2 This Powerpoint.
Reliability performance on language tests is also affected by factors other than communicative language ability. (1) test method facets They are systematic.
Lecture №1 Role of science in modern society. Role of science in modern society.
Example x y We wish to check for a non zero correlation.
Are Protected Values Quantity Sensitive? Rumen Iliev Northwestern University.
Two sides of optimism: The positive and negative consequences of dispositional optimism and optimistic attributional style Evgeny Osin (Higher School of.
The Psychologist as Detective, 4e by Smith/Davis © 2007 Pearson Education Chapter One: The Science of Psychology.
A. Strategies The general approach taken into an enquiry.
What is Research?. Intro.  Research- “Any honest attempt to study a problem systematically or to add to man’s knowledge of a problem may be regarded.
How Psychologists Do Research Chapter 2. How Psychologists Do Research What makes psychological research scientific? Research Methods Descriptive studies.
Receive-Accept-Sample Model an information-processing model GV917.
Sociology. Sociology is a science because it uses the same techniques as other sciences Explaining social phenomena is what sociological theory is all.
AS Ethics Utilitarianism Title: - Preference Utilitarianism To begin… What is meant by preference? L/O: To understand Preference Utilitarianism.
A. Judgment Heuristics Definition: Rule of thumb; quick decision guide When are heuristics used? - When making intuitive judgments about relative likelihoods.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc LEARNING GOAL Interpret and carry out hypothesis tests for independence of variables with data organized.
The Representativeness Heuristic then: Risk Attitude and Framing Effects Psychology 355: Cognitive Psychology Instructor: John Miyamoto 6/1/2016: Lecture.
Academic Writing Fatima AlShaikh. A duty that you are assigned to perform or a task that is assigned or undertaken. For example: Research papers (most.
Statistics & Evidence-Based Practice
Better to Give or to Receive?: The Role of Dispositional Gratitude
Exercise 2-7: Regression artefact: Lord’s paradox
Parts of an Academic Paper
Pavle Valerjev Marin Dujmović
12 Inferential Analysis.
1st: Representativeness Heuristic and Conjunction Errors 2nd: Risk Attitude and Framing Effects Psychology 355:
Introduction to Econometrics, 5th edition
Cross Sectional Designs
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 33
12 Inferential Analysis.
RESEARCH BASICS What is research?.
Inferential Statistics
HEURISTICS.
RESEARCH METHODS Lecture 33
Presentation transcript:

Protected Values and Heuristics and Biases Approach Rumen Iliev and Douglas Medin Northwestern University Abstract Protected values, which are values resisting any trade-offs, have recently entered the field of decision making and have challenged some of the main assumptions and theoretical models in the area. So far, the main efforts in research of protected values have been directed toward establishing adequate definition, identifying their main properties and describing some of their psychological correlates. In this paper we suggest an extension of this approach, focusing on the cognitive interpretation of the problem. We hypothesize that holding protected values will be related to the representation of information and thus will impact performance in some well known decision making tasks. We compared people who hold protected values on abortions with people who do not, and found different patterns of performance in conjunction fallacy and anchoring tasks. Participants with protected values showed higher rates of conjunction fallacy, but essentially no anchoring effect. Protected Values For long time the dominant paradigm in decision making research has been the utility theory, which relies on mechanisms of trade-offs to determine the value of an outcome. However, in the last decade there was increasing interest in morally motivated decisions, which proved to be challenging for the existing utility models. Baron and Spranca (1997) defined protected values (PVs) as “… those that resist trade-offs with other values, particularly with economic values”. Similarly, Tetlock et al. (1996) raised the question of existence of sacred values, which later (Tetlock et al., 2000) were defined as “any value that a moral community implicitly or explicitly treats as possessing infinite and transcendental significance that precludes comparisons, tradeoffs, or indeed any other mingling with bounded or secular values”. Features like infinite utility and restrictions of any trade offs could raise reasonable concerns if PVs exist at all. However, acts of environmental activists, anti-abortion groups, suicide bombers and self-immolating monks clearly demonstrates that PVs may exist in their strongest form. In the present research we explore the idea that protected values, being highly important, could have an impact to the information representation, thus people holding PVs could perform differently on some well established decision making tasks, depending on the content of the scenario. In the next part we compare the performance of PVs and no PVs subjects on anchoring and conjunction fallacy tasks. Our hypothesis is that PVs make part of the information more salient for the subject, and thus concentrate cognitive resources more on some cues of the situation, relatively ignoring others, and as such people with and without PVs will have different performance in relevant cognitive tasks. Study 1.a Conjunction fallacy Conjunction fallacy is a logical error which occurs when the probability of an event happening ( is judged to be lower than the probability that a single property that is part of the event happens. A conjunction fallacy would be to judge a person to be French as more likely than the probability that he is European. From a logical point of view it is an error since if AB, P(B) ≤ P(A); in other words, the highest possible value that P(B) could have is the probability of the inclusive set A. For this task we adjusted two of the original Tversky&Kahneman (1983) scenarios. The abortion relevant one was: Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations. And the subjects had to estimate the probability of two statements about Linda. A. Linda is a bank teller. B. Linda is a bank teller and pro-choice. Acknowledgements We are very grateful to Dan Bartels, Will Bennis, Sonya Suchdeva and Sara Unsworth for their valuable comments, as well as Brittany Koscher for part of the data collection. Hypothesis PVs could lead to higher salience of particular common features, thus to higher representativeness of the target to a particular group. If so, we could expect higher rates of conjunction fallacy among people holding PVs, but only for scenarios relevant to particular PVs. Method 128 Northwestern University undergraduates participated for course credit. First they were given a questionnaire on PVs, where on of the questions asked about their opinion on abortions. If they checked “this is unacceptable under any circumstances” they were considered to hold PVs on abortion. In addition we had one more abortion relevant scenario, implying that the person described is pro-life, and one neutral scenario, implying that the person is an accountant. If a subject judged that a conjunction is more likely than one of its part, it was counted as conjunction fallacy. Results 39 of all subjects (31%) showed PVs on abortion (PVa). For the consequent analysis we combined the two abortion relevant scenarios in one measure, combined abortion scenarios. The neutral scenario fallacy showed no relation with the PVa measure, while the combined fallacy was higher for people with PVs (F(1,127)=3.64, p=.06). We also explored if the combined abortion fallacies were related to the neutral scenario and rune 2x2 (PVs, neutral fallacy) ANOVA. The results showed main effect of the neutral scenario (F(1,124)=43.52, p<.05), as well as interaction between PVs and neutral fallacy (F(1,124)=4.68, p<.05). In other words, perhaps for more normative thinkers or for people who knew and might have applied probability theory, having a PVa did not affect whether a combined abortion conjunction fallacy was made, which is a plausible expectation. However, less normative readers revealed a relationship between holding PVa and occurrence of the fallacy, but only for the related scenarios. Study 1.b Anchoring For this task we used the basic anchoring paradigm (Wilson et al., 1996), according which the answer to a target question could be influenced by an anchor of non-related information. For example, we used the following scenario, where the number of years is the anchor and the percentage of abortions is the target: In recent research, published in Netherlands, it was estimated that the percentage of women who have had an abortion in Europe almost doubled in the last 20 years. What is your best guess for this percentage in the USA nowadays? Where we varied the number of years from 5 to 100. Fig.1 Conjunction fallacies for each of the three scenarios. Fig. 2 Combined conjunction fallacy as function of PVs and neutral fallacy. PV did matter only for people who failed the neutral scenario. Hypothesis Stronger focus of attention, or more cognitive resources dedicated to a concept related to PV, could lead to less attention to peripheral information, thus to less anchoring affect for people who hold PVs on a particular issue. Method The same participants from Study 1.a completed the anchoring task after they had finished with the previous tasks. The five possible anchors (5, 10, 20, 50, 100) had equal chance for appearance. Results The mean target answer was 26.7, SD= 17.6, whereas the true answer to the question is about 43%. The Pearson correlation between the target and the anchor across all subjects was r =.29, p<.05. There were no difference in the means or standard deviations between the two groups. The responses of the PVa subjects did not correlate with the anchor, r=.06, while the noPVa responses were significantly correlated, r=.37, p<.001. To test for a difference in the slopes, we ran regression analyses, regressing target answer on the anchor and PVa as well as their interaction. The first model showed three influential cases, further than 3 standard deviations from the regression line, and these cases turned out to be the most extreme responses to the target, 70(noPVa), 80(noPVa) and 80(PVa). After deleting these influential cases, we ran the model again, and found a significant interaction between PVa and the anchor b=-.13, p<.05). The two correlation coefficients now were.42 (p<.05) for the noPVa group and -.02 for the PVa group, suggesting that an anchoring effect occurred only for subjects without PVa,. Fig. 3 Two separate regression slopes for the two separate groups of subjects. After deleting three outliers (answers higher than 70%) the correlation between the anchor and the target was significant only for the no PV group. A regression analusis s showed significant interaction between PVs and the anchor (b=-.13, p<.05) Summary and conclusion The goal of this research was to explore the hypothesis that strong moral positions, in this case PVs, could influence the representation of information and the performance in decision making tasks. Our findings show that PV did influence performance, depending on the relevance of the task information to persons PVs. However, there is no unequivocal conclusions if PVs heart or help normative decision making. In the case with conjunction fallacy, PVs were related with less normative answers for the relevant scenarios, while in the anchoring task, people with PVs showed no anchoring. In short, this experiment demonstrates the possibility for exploration of the link between moral stands and cognitive processes and application of heuristics and biases paradigm to ethical research.