Abstract
Models of decision making postulate that interactions between contextual conditions and characteristics of the decision maker determine decision-making performance. We tested this assumption by using a possible positive contextual influence (goals) and a possible negative contextual influence (anchor) in a risky decision-making task (Game of Dice Task, GDT). In this task, making advantageous choices is well known to be closely related to a specific decision maker variable: the individual level of executive functions. One hundred subjects played the GDT in one of four conditions: with self-set goal for final balance (n = 25), with presentation of an anchor (a fictitious Top 10 list, showing high gains of other participants; n = 25), with anchor and goal definition (n = 25), and with neither anchor nor goal setting (n = 25). Subjects in the conditions with anchor made more risky decisions irrespective of the negative feedback, but this anchor effect was influenced by goal monitoring and moderated by the level of the subjects’ executive functions. The findings imply that impacts of situational influences on decision making as they frequently occur in real life depend upon the individual’s cognitive abilities. Anchor effects can be overcome by subjects with good cognitive abilities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Appelt KC, Milch KF, Handgraaf MJJ, Weber EU (2011) The decision making individual differences inventory and guidelines for the study of individual differences in judgment and decision-making research. Judgm Decis Mak 6:252–262
Atkinson JW (1957) Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychol Rev 64:357–372. doi:10.1037/h0043445
Bar-Hillel M (1973) On the subjective probability of compound events. Organ Behav Hum Perform 9:396–406. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(73)90061-5
Bayard S, Abril B, Yu H, Scholz S, Carlander B, Dauvilliers Y (2011) Decision making in narcolepsy with cataplexy. Sleep 34:99–104
Bechara A (2011) The somatic marker framework and the neurological basis of decision making. In: Ebstein RP, Shamay-Tsoory S, Chew SH (eds) From DNA to social cognition. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 159–183
Bechara A, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio AR (1997) Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science 275:1293–1295. doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293
Bechara A, Damasio H, Damasio AR (2000a) Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cereb Cortex 10:295–307. doi:10.1093/cercor/10.3.295
Bechara A, Tranel D, Damasio H (2000b) Characterization of the decision-making deficit of patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions. Brain 123:2189–2202. doi:10.1093/brain/123.11.2189
Bechara A, Dolan S, Denburg N, Hindes A, Anderson SW, Nathan PE (2001) Decision-making deficits, linked to a dysfunctional ventromedial prefrontal cortex, revealed in alcohol and stimulant abusers. Neuropsychologia 39:376–389. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(00)00136-6
Bonatti E, Zamarian L, Wagner M, Benke T, Hollosi P, Strubreither W, Delazer M (2008) Making decisions and advising decisions in traumatic brain injury. Cogn Behav Neurol 21:164–175. doi:10.1097/WNN.0b013e318184e688
Bond CF, Titus LJ (1983) Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychol Bull 94:265–292. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.94.2.265
Brand M (2008) Does the feedback from previous trials influence current decisions? A study on the role of feedback processing in making decisions under explicit risk conditions. J Neuropsychol 2:431–443. doi:10.1348/174866407X220607
Brand M, Labudda K, Kalbe E, Hilker R, Emmans D, Fuchs G, Kessler J, Markowitsch HJ (2004) Decision-making impairments in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Behav Neurol 15:77–85
Brand M, Fujiwara E, Borsutzky S, Kalbe E, Kessler J, Markowitsch HJ (2005a) Decision-making deficits of Korsakoff patients in a new gambling task with explicit rules: associations with executive functions. Neuropsychol 19:267–277. doi:10.1037/0894-4105.19.3.267
Brand M, Kalbe E, Labudda K, Fujiwara E, Kessler J, Markowitsch HJ (2005b) Decision-making impairments in patients with pathological gambling. Psychiatry Res 133:91–99. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2004.10.003
Brand M, Labudda K, Markowitsch HJ (2006) Neuropsychological correlates of decision-making in ambiguous and risky situations. Neural Netw 19:1266–1276. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2006.03.001
Brand M, Recknor EC, Grabenhorst F, Bechara A (2007) Decisions under ambiguity and decisions under risk: correlations with executive functions and comparisons of two different gambling tasks with implicit and explicit rules. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 29:86–99. doi:10.1080/13803390500507196
Brand M, Heinze K, Labudda K, Markowitsch HJ (2008) The role of strategies in deciding advantageously in ambiguous and risky situations. Cogn Process 9:159–173. doi:10.1007/s10339-008-0204-4
Brand M, Laier C, Pawlikowski M, Markowitsch HJ (2009) Decision making with and without feedback: the role of intelligence, strategies, executive functions, and cognitive styles. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 31:984–998. doi:10.1080/13803390902776860
Bröder A, Schiffer S (2003) Take The Best versus simultaneous feature matching: probabilistic inferences from memory and effects of representation format. J Exp Psychol Gen 132:277–293. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.277
Chapman GB, Johnson EJ (2002) Incorporating the irrelevant: anchors in judgments of belief and value. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D (eds) Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment, vol 16. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 120–138
Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral science, 3rd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah
Cokely ET, Kelley CM (2009) Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: a protocol analysis and process model evaluation. Judgm Decis Mak 4:20–33. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2009.04.001
De Martino B, Kumaran D, Seymour B, Dolan RJ (2006) Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in the human brain. Science 313:684–687. doi:10.1126/science.1128356
Delazer M, Zamarian L, Bonatti E, Walser N, Kuchukhidze G, Bodner T, Benke T, Koppelstaetter F, Trinka E (2011) Decision making under ambiguity in temporal lobe epilepsy: does the location of the underlying structural abnormality matter? Epilepsy Behav 20:34–37. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2010.11.006
Devine DJ, Kozlowski SWJ (1995) Domain-specific knowledge and task characteristics in decision making. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 64:294–306. doi:10.1006/obhd.1995.1107
Dislich FXR, Zinkernagel A, Ortner TM, Schmitt M (2010) Convergence of direct, indirect, and objective risk-taking measures in gambling. J Psychol 218:20–27. doi:10.1027/0044-3409/a000004
Drucaroff LJ, Kievit R, Guinjoan SM, Gerschcovich ER, Cerquetti D, Leiguarda R, Cardinali DP, Vigo DE (2011) Higher autonomic activation predicts better performance in Iowa Gambling Task. Cogn Behav Neurol 24:93–98. doi:10.1097/WNN.0b013e3182239308
Duncan J (1986) Disorganisation of behaviour after frontal lobe damage. Cogn Neuropsychol 3:271–290. doi:10.1080/02643298608253360
Einhorn HJ, Hogarth RM (1986) Decision making under ambiguity. J Bus 59:S225–S250
Elliot AJ, Fryer JW (2008) The goal construct in psychology. In: Kruglanski AW, Higgins ET (eds) Handbook of motivation science. Guilford Press, New York, pp 235–250. doi:10.1007/s11031-007-9058-9
Englich B, Mussweiler T, Strack F (2006) Playing dice with criminal sentences: the influence of irrelevant anchors on experts’ judicial decision making. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 32:188–200. doi:10.1177/0146167205282152
Epley N, Gilovich T (2006) The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychol Sci 17:311–318. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x
Euteneuer F, Schaefer F, Stuermer R, Boucsein W, Timmermann L, Barbe MT, Ebersbach G, Otto J, Kessler J, Kalbe E (2009) Dissociation of decision-making under ambiguity and decision-making under risk in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a neuropsychological and psychophysiological study. Neuropsychologia 47:2882–2890. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.014
Festinger L (1954) A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Rel 7:117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202
Finucane ML, Lees NB (2005) Decision-making competence of older adults: models and methods. In: National Research Council Workshop on decision-making by older adult, Washington, November 29
Finucane ML, Mertz CK, Slovic P, Schmidt ES (2005) Task complexity and older adults’ decision-making competence. Psychol Aging 20:71–84. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.20.1.71
Gleichgerrcht E, Ibánez A, Roca M, Torralva T, Manes F (2010) Decision-making cognition in neurodegenerative diseases. Nat Rev Neurol 6:611–623. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2010.148
Hassin RR, Bargh JA, Zimerman S (2009) Automatic and flexible: the case of non-conscious goal pursuit. Soc Cogn 27:20–36. doi:10.1521/soco.2009.27.1.20
Heath C, Larrick RP, Wu G (1999) Goals as reference points. Cogn Psychol 38:79–109. doi:10.1006/cogp.1998.0708
Kahneman D (2003) A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol 58:697–720. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291. doi:10.2307/1914185
Kivetz R (2003) The effects of effort and intrinsic motivation on risky choice. Mark Sci 22:477–502. doi:10.1287/mksc.22.4.477.24911
Knight D, Durham CC, Locke EA (2001) The relationship of team goals, incentives, and efficacy to strategic risk, tactical implementation, and performance. Acad Manag J 44:326–338. doi:10.2307/3069459
Kühberger A (1998) The influence of framing on risky decisions: a meta-analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 75:23–55. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2781
Labudda K, Wolf OT, Markowitsch HJ, Brand M (2007) Decision-making and neuroendocrine responses in pathological gamblers. Psychiatry Res 153:233–243. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2007.02.002
Levine B, Robertson IH, Clare L, Carter G, Hong J, Wilson BA, Duncan J, Stuss DT (2000) Rehabilitation of executive functioning: an experimental–clinical validation of goal management training. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 6:299–312
Lopes LL, Oden GC (1999) The role of aspiration level in risky choice: a comparison of cumulative prospect theory and SP/A theory. J Math Psychol 43:286–313. doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1259
Nelson HE (1976) A modified card sorting test sensitive to frontal lobe defects. Cortex 12:313–324. doi:10.1080/13854049608406687
Norman DA, Shallice T (1986) Attention to action: willed and automatic control of behavior. In: Davidson RJ, Schwartz GE, Shapiro D (eds) Consciousness and self-regulation. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 1–18
Payne JW, Laughhunn DJ, Crum R (1980) Translation of gambles and aspiration level effects in risky choice behavior. Manag Sci 26:1039–1060. doi:10.1287/mnsc.26.10.1039
Payne JW, Laughhunn DJ, Crum R (1981) Further tests of aspiration level effects in risky choice behavior. Manag Sci 27:953–958. doi:10.1287/mnsc.27.8.953
Pervin LA (1989) Goal concepts in personality and social psychology: a historical perspective. In: Pervin LA (ed) Goal concepts in personality and social psychology. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 1–17
Sanders GS, Baron RS, Moore DL (1978) Distraction and social comparison as mediators of social facilitation effects. J Exp Soc Psychol 14:291–303. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(78)90017-3
Schiebener J, Zamarian L, Delazer M, Brand M (2011) Executive functions, categorization of probabilities and learning from feedback: what does really matter for decision-making under explicit risk conditions? J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 33:1025–1039. doi:10.1080/13803395.2011.595702
Simon H (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quat J Econ 69:99–118. doi:10.2307/1884852
Simon H (1982) Models of bounded rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge
Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285. doi:10.1126/science.3563507
Slovic P, Fischoff B, Lichenstein S (1979) Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. Policy Practice Health Saf 3:65–102
Smith EE, Jonides J (1999) Storage and executive processes in the frontal lobes. Science 283:1657–1661. doi:10.1126/science.283.5408.1657
Smith K, Dickhaut J, McCabe K, Pardo JV (2002) Neuronal substrates for choice under ambiguity, risk, gains, and losses. Manag Sci 48:711–718. doi:10.1287/mnsc.48.6.711.194
Starcke K, Brand M (2012) Decision making under stress: a selective review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 36:1228–1248. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.02.003
Starcke K, Pawlikowski M, Wolf OT, Altstötter-Gleich C, Brand M (2011) Decision making under risk conditions is susceptible to interference by a secondary executive task. Cogn Process 12:177–182. doi:10.1007/s10339-010-0387-3
Suls J, Martin R, Wheeler L (2002) Social comparison: why, with whom, and with what effect? Curr Dir Psychol Sci 11:159–163. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00191
Toplak ME, Sorge GB, Benoit A, West RF, Stanovich KE (2010) Decision-making and cognitive abilities: a review of associations between Iowa Gambling Task performance, executive functions, and intelligence. Clin Psychol Rev 30:562–581. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.04.002
Turnbull OH, Evans CE, Bunce A, Carzolio B, O’Connor J (2005) Emotion-based learning and central executive resources: an investigation of intuition and the Iowa Gambling Task. Brain Cogn 57:244–247. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.08.053
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
Wright WF, Anderson U (1989) Effects of situation familiarity and financial incentives on use of the anchoring and adjustment heuristic for probability assessment. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 44:68–82. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(89)90035-6
Youssef F, Dookeeram K, Basdeo V, Francis E, Doman M, Mamed D, Maloo S, Degannes J, Dobo L, Ditshotlo P, Legall G (2011) Stress alters personal moral decision making. Psychoneuroendocrinology 37:491–498. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.07.017
Zajonc RB (1965) Social facilitation. Science 149:269–274. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.08.017
Zamarian L, Sinz H, Bonatti E, Gamboz N, Delazer M (2008) Normal aging affects decisions under ambiguity, but not decisions under risk. Neuropsychol 22:645–657. doi:10.1037/0894-4105.22.5.645
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schiebener, J., Wegmann, E., Pawlikowski, M. et al. Anchor effects in decision making can be reduced by the interaction between goal monitoring and the level of the decision maker’s executive functions. Cogn Process 13, 321–332 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-012-0522-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-012-0522-4