Traditional utility theories postulate an economic decision maker who, in the course of being economical, is rational. The problem with this view is that it does not actually describe how people behave. When faced with choices, we use simple decision heuristics rather than formal analyses. Some researchers have argued that heuristics constitute reasoning errors that, if corrected, would improve decisions. Others contend that heuristics reduce effort and perform as well as – or better than – more complex methods. The latter view is best exemplified in Gigerenzer and colleagues’ adaptive toolbox theory. In brief, the cognitive system contains a toolbox of heuristics that can be applied to a range of problems.
Although the adaptive toolbox theory has been tremendously influential, our understanding of the toolbox is incomplete. My work addresses two neglected questions in heuristics research. First, when do people use heuristics and how can we know? Second, do people choose adaptively among heuristics, and if so, how? To address these questions, I use verbal protocol analysis to identify what information people use to make decisions, and how they use that information. The promise of verbal data lay in their use to develop and test detailed information processing models. To that end, I employ protocol analysis in conjunction with computational simulations using the integrated cognitive architecture Adaptive Control of Thought – Rational (ACT-R).
• • • • •
Walsh, M. M., & Gluck, K. A. (2016). Verbalization of decision strategies in multiple-cue probabilistic inference. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 78-91.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H.A. (1993) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review 959 of Psychology, 62, 451-482.
Matthew Walsh 