Probability matching and strategy availability
Open accessAbstract
Findings from two experiments indicate that probability matching in sequential choice arises from an asymmetry in strategy availability: The matching strategy comes readily to mind, whereas a superior alternative strategy, maximizing, does not. First, compared with the minority who spontaneously engage in maximizing, the majority of participants endorse maximizing as superior to matching in a direct comparison when both strategies are described. Second, when the maximizing strategy is brought to their attention, more participants subsequently engage in maximizing. Third, matchers are more likely than maximizers to base decisions in other tasks on their initial intuitions, suggesting that they are more inclined to use a choice strategy that comes to mind quickly. These results indicate that a substantial subset of probability matchers are victims of "underthinking" rather than "overthinking": They fail to engage in sufficient deliberation to generate a superior alternative to the matching strategy that comes so readily to mind.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
As preregistered, probability matchers and maximizers have been categorized in prior work.
“As preregistered, this is how probability matchers and maximizers have been categorized in prior work (e.g.,Koehler and James, 2010).”
From Probability matching and statistical naïveté (2025) · cites this paper as Koehler and James, 2010
Koehler and James (2010) found significant correlations between the CRT and the use of and endorsement of maximizing strategies on probabilistic prediction tasks.
“Finally, Koehler and James (2010) found significant correlations between the CRT and the use of and endorsement of maximizing strategies on probabilistic prediction tasks.”
From The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks (2011) · cites this paper as Koehler and James (2010)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359 · see citing works
Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making
Frederick, S. (2005) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/089533005775196732 · Cited by 5,256 · see citing works
Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · Cited by 5,137 · see citing works
Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00003435 · Cited by 4,255 · see citing works
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476 · see citing works
Belief in the law of small numbers.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031322 · Cited by 3,246 · see citing works
Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. J. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.972 · Cited by 1,258 · see citing works
On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.672 · Cited by 840 · see citing works
Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. J. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.819 · Cited by 620 · see citing works
Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. J. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.66.5.819 · Cited by 593 · see citing works
Stanovich, K. E. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230167.003.0003 · Cited by 532 · see citing works
An Economist’s Perspective on Probability Matching
Vulkan, N. (2000) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/1467-6419.00106 · Cited by 401 · see citing works
A re‐examination of probability matching and rational choice
Shanks, D. R., Tunney, R. J., & McCarthy, J. D. (2002) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.413 · Cited by 322 · see citing works
The smart potential behind probability matching
Gaissmaier, W., & Schooler, L. J. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.09.007 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
Is probability matching smart? Associations between probabilistic choices and cognitive ability
West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03194383 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Probability matching in choice under uncertainty: intuition versus deliberation.
Koehler, D. J., & James, G. (2009) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.003 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Self-citationUnderstanding Repeated Simple Choices
Gal, I. (1996) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/135467896394573 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Probability matching: Encouraging optimal responding in humans.
Fantino, E., & Esfandiari, A. (2002) · Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · doi:10.1037/h0087385 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Dual process theories: A key for understanding the diversification bias?
Kogler, C., & Kühberger, A. (2007) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/s11166-007-9008-7 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1 · Cited by 1,047 · see citing works
Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.844729 · Cited by 864 · see citing works
Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test
Thomson, K. S., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2016) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500007622 · Cited by 612 · see citing works
Cognitive sophistication does not attenuate the bias blind spot.
West, R. F., Meserve, R. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028857 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition?
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0576-1 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Browne, M., Thomson, P., Rockloff, M., & Pennycook, G. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132562 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Stanovich, K. E. (2012) · The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0022 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
The time course of conflict on the Cognitive Reflection Test
Travers, E., Rolison, J. J., & Feeney, A. (2016) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.015 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Navarro, D., Newell, B. R., & Schulze, C. (2016) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.01.001 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Can exposure to prenatal sex hormones (2D:4D) predict cognitive reflection?
Bosch‐Domènech, A., Brañas‐Garza, P., & Espín, A. M. (2014) · Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.01.023 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
On the Decision to Explore New Alternatives: The Coexistence of Under‐ and Over‐exploration
Teodorescu, K., & Erev, I. (2013) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1785 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Stupple, E. J. N., Pitchford, M., Ball, L. J., Hunt, T. E., & Steel, R. P. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0186404 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Primi, C., Donati, M. A., Chiesi, F., & Morsanyi, K. (2017) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2017.1387606 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Lawson, M. A., Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2020) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500007865 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Shenhav, A., Rand, D. G., & Greene, J. D. (2017) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500005209 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
More heads choose better than one: Group decision making can eliminate probability matching
Schulze, C., & Newell, B. R. (2015) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0949-6 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Deciding to be authentic: Intuition is favored over deliberation when authenticity matters
Oktar, K., & Lombrozo, T. (2022) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105021 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Deliberate reasoning is not affected by language
Mækelæ, M. J., & Pfuhl, G. (2019) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0211428 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
One test, five scoring procedures: different ways of approaching the cognitive reflection test
Erceg, N., & Bubić, A. (2017) · Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/20445911.2016.1278004 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Crowdsourcing Intelligent Research Participants: A Student versus MTurk Comparison
Buchheit, S., Dalton, D. W., Pollard, T., & Stinson, S. R. (2018) · Behavioral Research in Accounting · doi:10.2308/bria-52340 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Probability matching in risky choice: The interplay of feedback and strategy availability
Newell, B. R., Koehler, D. J., James, G. M., Rakow, T., & van Ravenzwaaij, D. (2012) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0268-3 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Self-citationAdapting to the algorithm: how accuracy comparisons promote the use of a decision aid
Liang, G., Sloane, J., Donkin, C., & Newell, B. R. (2022) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-022-00364-y · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Banking on a Bad Bet: Probability Matching in Risky Choice Is Linked to Expectation Generation
James, G., & Koehler, D. J. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611407933 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citationReasoning and choice in the Monty Hall Dilemma (MHD): implications for improving Bayesian reasoning
Tubau, E., Aguilar‐Lleyda, D., & Johnson, E. D. M. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00353 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
The effect of cognitive reflection on the efficacy of impression management
Cardoso, R. L., Leite, R. D. O., & de Aquino, A. C. B. (2018) · Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-10-2016-2731 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Is it cognitive effort you measure? Comparing three task paradigms to the Need for Cognition scale
Mækelæ, M. J., Klevjer, K., Westbrook, A., Eby, N. S., Eriksen, R., & Pfuhl, G. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290177 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Betting on Illusory Patterns: Probability Matching in Habitual Gamblers
Gaissmaier, W., Wilke, A., Scheibehenne, B., McCanney, P., & Barrett, H. C. (2015) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-015-9539-9 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
The Effects of Heuristics and Apophenia on Probabilistic Choice
Ellerby, Z. W., & Tunney, R. J. (2017) · Advances in Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.5709/acp-0228-9 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Probability Matching, Fast and Slow
Koehler, D. J., & James, G. M. (2014) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800283-4.00003-4 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citationStatistical numeracy as a moderator of (pseudo)contingency effects on decision behavior
Fleig, H., Meiser, T., Ettlin, F., & Rummel, J. (2017) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.01.002 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Zonca, J., Coricelli, G., & Polonio, L. (2020) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500007373 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Probability matching is not the default decision making strategy in human and non-human primates
Saldana, C., Claidière, N., Fagot, J., & Smith, K. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-16983-w · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Agranov, M., Healy, P. J., & Nielsen, K. (2023) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.1093/ej/uead039 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
da Silva, C. F., Victorino, C. G., Caticha, N., & Baldo, M. V. C. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-15587-z · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Compete, coordinate, and cooperate: How to exploit uncertain environments with social interaction.
Schulze, C., & Newell, B. R. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000096 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Gaze data reveal individual differences in relational representation processes.
Zonca, J., Coricelli, G., & Polonio, L. (2019) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/xlm0000723 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Effect of visual aids and individual differences of cognitive traits in judgments on food safety
Honda, H., Ogawa, M., Murakoshi, T., Masuda, T., Utsumi, K., Park, S., Kimura, A., Nei, D., & Wada, Y. (2015) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.05.010 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Limited evidence for probability matching as a strategy in probability learning tasks
(2021) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/bs.plm.2021.02.005 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Schulze, C., & Newell, B. R. (2016) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-016-0595-x · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Verawati, N. N. S. P., Hikmawati, H., & Prayogi, S. (2019) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1397/1/012009 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Persistence is futile: Chasing of past performance in repeated investment choices.
Weiss‐Cohen, L., Newall, P. W. S., & Ayton, P. (2021) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/xap0000358 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Analytic Thinking and Political Orientation in the Corona Crisis
Maglić, M., Pavlović, T. M., & Franc, R. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631800 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Variation in risk judgment on radiation contamination of food: Thinking trait and profession
Honda, H., Ogawa, M., Murakoshi, T., Masuda, T., Utsumi, K., Nei, D., & Wada, Y. (2015) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.07.014 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Striving for perfection and falling short: The influence of goals on probability matching
Gao, J., & Corter, J. E. (2015) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-014-0500-4 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Maximizing as satisficing: On pattern matching and probability maximizing in groups and individuals
Schulze, C., Gaissmaier, W., & Newell, B. R. (2020) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104382 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Effect of individual thinking styles on item selection during study time allocation
Jia, X., Li, W., Cao, L., Li, P., Shi, M., Wang, J., Wei, C., & Li, X. (2016) · International Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1002/ijop.12267 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Hold it! The influence of lingering rewards on choice diversification and persistence.
Schulze, C., van Ravenzwaaij, D., & Newell, B. R. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/xlm0000407 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Hendijani, R., Ghafourian, F., & Attari, I. (2021) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01459-3 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Bayesian teaching enables probabilistic reasoning in large language models
Qiu, L., Sha, F., Allen, K. R., Kim, Y., Linzen, T., & van Steenkiste, S. (2026) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-67998-6 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Asymmetrical learning and memory for acquired gain versus loss associations
Lin, Z., Cabrera-Haro, L. E., & Reuter‐Lorenz, P. A. (2020) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104318 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
The effect of explanation in simple binary decision tasks
Taylor, E. G., Landy, D. H., & Ross, B. H. (2012) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.656664 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Contribution of rationality to vaccine attitudes: Testing two hypotheses
Tomljenović, H., Bubić, A., & Erceg, N. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2260 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
People express more bias in their predictions than in their likelihood judgments.
Park, I., Windschitl, P. D., Miller, J. E., Smith, A. R., Stuart, J. O., & Biangmano, M. (2022) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0001258 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Ellerby, Z. W., & Tunney, R. J. (2019) · Advances in Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.5709/acp-0261-2 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Alempaki, D., Burdea, V., & Read, D. (2021) · Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics · doi:10.1086/733780 · Cited by 282 · see citing works
Push Outcomes Bias Perceptions of Scratch Card Games
Walker, A. C., Stange, M., Dixon, M. J., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2022) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-022-10125-7 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
The Monty Hall dilemma with pigeons: No, you choose for me
Zentall, T. R., Case, J. P., & Collins, T. L. (2015) · Learning & Behavior · doi:10.3758/s13420-015-0172-3 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Fetal testosterone (2D:4D) as predictor of cognitive reflectionPreprint
Bosch‐Domènech, A., Brañas‐Garza, P., & Espín, A. M. (2013) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Probabilistic prediction and context tree identification in the Goalkeeper game
Hernández, N., Galves, A., García, J. E., Gubitoso, M. D., & Vargas, C. D. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-66009-w · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Corser, R., Voss, R. P., & Jasper, J. D. (2024) · Journal of Numerical Cognition · doi:10.5964/jnc.12473 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
5 Culture’s Influences on Cognitive Reflection
Čavojová, V., & Hanák, R. (2016) · Human factors and ergonomics · doi:10.1201/9781315369587-6 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Mækelæ, M. J., Kreis, I. V., & Pfuhl, G. (2024) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.14532 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Task switching with probabilistic reward schemes
Janczyk, M., Danwitz, L., Fröber, K., & von Helversen, B. (2025) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105029 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
On the Stochasticity of Ultimatum Games
Qi, T., Xu, B., Wu, J., & Vriend, N. J. (2022) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2022.07.005 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Forsgren, M., Juslin, P., & van den Berg, R. (2019) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.01.30.927558 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Probability matching and statistical naïveté
Barlow, M., Doan, T., Friedman, O., & Denison, S. (2025) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/jdm.2025.10014 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Do children match described probabilities? The sampling hypothesis applied to repeated risky choice
Thoma, A. I., & Schulze, C. (2024) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106126 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Factors Affecting Probability Matching Behavior
Gao, J. (2013) · doi:10.7916/d8sf33j6 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Hendijani, R. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2021.101778 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Rational After All: Changes in Probability Matching Behaviour Across Time in Humans and MonkeysPreprint
Saldana, C., Claidière, N., Fagot, J., & Smith, K. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/f5jts · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Towards an Understanding of How People Build Mental Representations
Valadao, D. F. (2016) · UWSpace (University of Waterloo)
Strimaitis, J. (2018) · UTC Scholar (University of Tennessee at Chattanooga) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
"科学的"情報はどのように理解されるのか？ ―食品の機能性理解と認知特性の個人差を視点とした分析
井上, 紗., 本田, 秀., 数馬, 森., 山本, 万., 武夫, 椎., 曲山, 幸., 成美, 永., & 和田有史 (2018) · 認知科学 · doi:10.11225/jcss.25.7
[Angina pectoris and normal coronography findings].
Spáčil, J., Fabián, J., Brodan, V., Belán, A., & Andĕl, M. (1980) · PubMed
Essays on the impacts of environment on uncertainty attitudes and consumption choices
Izah, A. (2019) · Open Access at Essex (University of Essex)
نژاد, م. ح., اصولیان, م., & نژادی, ی. ح. (2019) · نشریه چشم انداز مدیریت مالی · doi:10.52547/jfmp.9.28.143
Verawati, N. N. S. P., Hikmawati, H., Prayogi, S., & Ernita, N. (2023) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0122947
Analitičko rasuđivanje i uvjerenja koja proizvode polarizaciju
Maglić, M. (2023) · doi:10.17234/diss.2023.102859 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Feng, H., Huang, D., Wang, J., & Zhang, Z. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5396860
Liang, G., Sloane, J., Donkin, C., & Newell, B. R. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19144942
Probabilistic functionalism as a limiting condition for robustness
Forsgren, M., Mandl, B., & Rehbinder, G. K. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-32580-z
A Computational Toolkit for Designing and Analysing Repeated Binary Choice ExperimentsPreprint
Costa, B. L., Baldo, M. V. C., & da Silva, C. F. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.01.21.700416
Food Packaging and Human Interaction: Designing for Accessibility, Perception, and Portion Guidance
Tang, T. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-34158-8.00024-4
Larocca, V., & Panaccione, L. (2026) · Games · doi:10.3390/g17050057
- Authors
- J. Koehler, D., & James, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Waterloo (CA)
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 667-676
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- OpenAlex
- W1979776966
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- 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 › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Keywords
- probability matching, maximization, sequential choice, overthinking, intuition, decision-making, strategy selection, deliberation
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Choice Behavior, Cues, Female, Humans, Individuality, Judgment, Male, Probability Learning, Problem Solving, Thinking, Intuition
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
