Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 829

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effort and Accuracy in Choice

Johnson, Eric J., Payne, John W.·1985·Management Science
DOI 10.1287/mnsc.31.4.395
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Individuals often use several different strategies such as the expected value rule, conjunctive rule, and elimination-by-aspects, to make decisions. It has been hypothesized that strategy selection is, in part, a function of (1) the ability of a strategy to produce an accurate response and (2) the strategy's demand for mental resources or effort. We examine effort and accuracy and their role in strategy selection. Several strategies that may be used to make choices under risk are simulated using a production system framework. This framework allows the estimation of the effort required to use the strategy in a choice environment, while simultaneously measuring its accuracy relative to a normative model. A series of Monte-Carlo studies varied several aspects of the choice environments, including the complexity of the task and the presence or absence of dominated alternatives. These simulations identify strategies which approximate the accuracy of normative procedures while requiring substantially less effort. These results, however, are highly contingent upon characteristics of the task environment. The potential of production system models in understanding task effects in decisions is stressed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.31.4.395

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W.
Venue
Management Science
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
1985-04
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
395-414
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
DOI
10.1287/mnsc.31.4.395
OpenAlex
W2072889183
Cited by
829
References
2
FWCI
7.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.