Attentional biases in sequential sampling can give rise to nonlinear probability weighting. 👇Thread on my new paper with Thorsten Pachur, now accepted at Psychological Review!. Preprint: .@arc_mpib @mpib_berlin .1/10

RT @SciReports: Attentional dynamics of evidence accumulation explain why more numerate people make better decisions under risk @VZilker.ht….

Generate videos in just a few seconds. Try Grok Imagine, free for a limited time.

RT @decisionneurop: Attentional dynamics of evidence accumulation explain why more numerate people make better decisions under risk https:/….

#OpenAccess postprint of my paper showing that attentional biases can render decision making more efficient—available thanks to the amazing team of the @mpib_berlin library! 🙏. Check it out here:.

Overall, the analyzes highlight the power of computational modeling in the evidence accumulation framework to concurrently formalize various processing mechanisms & their dynamic interplay. This helps uncover the cognitive roots of individual differences in decision making. 8/8.

Crucially, no single mechanisms fully explains the link between numeracy and decision quality, but together. ✔️wider choice boundaries &.✔️less distorted processing of unattended information. mediate this link almost entirely. 7/8

These differences in processing between the more and less numerate are most pronounced when the option with the higher EV is risky (vs. safe)—as are differences in decision quality. 6/8.

Eye-tracking data and aDDM parameter estimates reveal that more numerate people. ✔️pay slightly more attention to the higher EV option,.✔️gather more evidence before making a choice,.✔️and distort unattended value information less. than less numerate people. 5/8

Here I use the attentional Drift Diffusion Model (aDDM) to concurrently formalize & test three candidate processes that might explain this relationship between numeracy and decision quality. 4/8

Notably, the link between numeracy and decision quality depends on the structure of choice problems. More numerate people maximize more when the higher EV option is risky. When the higher EV option is safe, even less numerate people maximize quite consistently. 3/8

In risky choice, decision quality is often measured based on EV maximization. One crucial factor determining individual differences in EV maximization is numeracy—the ability to comprehend, interpret, and transform probabilistic information. 2/8

Why do more numerate people tend to make better decisions under risk?. My ✨ new paper in @SciReports ✨ offers an explanation in terms of pre-decisional information search and processing, using computational modeling. 👇 Thread below. 1/8

Now available: ✨#OpenAccess postprint✨ of our paper on attribute attention and option attention in risky choice, thanks to the fantastic team of the @mpib_berlin library 🙏. Check it out here:.

Join our diverse team for a 3-year Post-Doc in Cognitive Psychology at KU Eichstätt! 100% position (Verbeamtung auf Zeit/TV-L), focused on decision science & computational modeling. No denominational requirements. Apply by 2024-03-31. Details: Please RT!.

RT @ThorstenPachur: @VZilker discovers a description-experience gap in attention that accounts for the description-experience gap in risky….

I had a great time talking about how attention can explain the description-experience gap at the #SPUDM poster session. Thanks to everyone who dropped by! . If you want to hear more about this work come to my talk tomorrow at 12:15.

Moreover, our findings have practical implications:. Depending on which facet of attention gives rise to distortions in probability weighting in a given case, different interventions may be required to successfully increase objective, linear weighting. 8/8.

These findings have important implications for cognitive process models of risky choice:. Such models should concurrently account for the effects of both facets of attention allocation on preference formation. 7/8.

Biases in attribute attention and option attention also entail distinct qualitative patterns in probability weighting. 6/8

Moreover, attribute attention and option attention have independent effects on preferences formalized in terms of probability weighting functions. Their effects do not interact with each other. 5/8

Using process-tracing data, we show that attribute attention and option attention are at best weakly related to each other. 4/8