Cited by 155Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and Testing

Executive functions in decision making: An individual differences approach

Del Missier, Fabio, Mäntylä, Timo, Bruine de Bruin, Wändi·2010·Thinking & Reasoning

Abstract

This individual differences study examined the relationships between three executive functions (updating, shifting, and inhibition), measured as latent variables, and performance on two cognitively demanding subtests of the Adult Decision Making Competence battery: Applying Decision Rules and Consistency in Risk Perception. Structural equation modelling showed that executive functions contribute differentially to performance in these two tasks, with Applying Decision Rules being mainly related to inhibition and Consistency in Risk Perception mainly associated to shifting. The results suggest that the successful application of decision rules requires the capacity to selectively focus attention and inhibit irrelevant (or no more relevant) stimuli. They also suggest that consistency in risk perception depends on the ability to shift between judgement contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13546781003630117

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These results converge with a body of other work indicating that susceptibility to these biases varies considerably.

    “These results converge with a body of other work indicating that the susceptibility to these biases varies considerably (Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007;Cokely & Kelley, 2009;Del Missier, Mantyla, & Bruine de Bruine, 2010;Dohmen, Falk, Huffman, Marklein, & Sunde, 2009;Klaczynski, 2001;Oechssler et al., 2009;Stanovich & West, 1998a, 1998c, 1999, 2000, 2008b;West et al., 2008).”

    From The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks (2011) · cites this paper as Del Missier, Mantyla, & Bruine de Bruine, 2010

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 81 · Cited by 155

Authors
Del Missier, F., Mäntylä, T., & Bruine de Bruin, W.
Affiliations
  • University of Trieste
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • Carnegie Mellon University
Venue
Thinking & Reasoning
Published
2010-03-23
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
69-97
ISSN
  • 1354-6783 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0708
OpenAlex
W2155858802
Cited by
155
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 12
FWCI
8.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Thinking & Reasoning (publishedVersion)
  • ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
executive function, decision-making, individual differences, updating, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, risk perception, selective attention, latent variables

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review