The effects of problem content and scientific background on information search and the assessment and valuation of correlations.
The effects of problem contents and one's scientific background on the detection of correlations and the assessment of their strength were studied using a task that required active data search, assessment of the strength of a correlation, and monetary valuation of the correlation's predictive utility. Participants (N = 72) who were trained either in the natural sciences or in the social sciences and humanities explored data sets differing in contents and actual strength of correlation. Data search was consistent across all variables: Participants drew relatively small samples whose relative sizes would favor the detection of a correlation, if one existed. In contrast, the assessment of the correlation strength and the valuation of its predictive utility were strongly related not only to its objective strength, but also to the correspondence between problem contents and one's scientific background: When the two matched, correlations were judged to be stronger and more valuable than when they did not.
School of Education, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel.
Shira
S
Soffer
Yaakov
Y
Kareev
D002784:Cholesterol / Q000097:blood; D004522:Educational Status; D005260:Female; D020022:Genetic Predisposition to Disease / Q000235:genetics; D006801:Humans; D006937:Hypercholesterolemia / Q000097:blood / Q000235:genetics; D007600:Judgment; D008297:Male; D009042:Motivation; D009154:Mutation; D011337:Probability Learning; D011340:Problem Solving; D012201:Reward; D012586:Science / Q000193:education*; D013223:Statistics as Topic
D002784:Cholesterol
Behav Sci. 1964 Jul;9(3):226-32
5888778
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Jun;60(6):753-61
17514591
Can J Exp Psychol. 2000 Mar;54(1):15-32
10721236
Trends Cogn Sci. 2006 Jul;10(7):309-18
16797219
Psychol Sci. 2004 Aug;15(8):534-9
15270998
J Exp Child Psychol. 1990 Feb;49(1):31-57
2303776
Psychol Rev. 2000 Jul;107(3):593-600
10941282
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Mar;35(2):371-80
19271852
Learn Behav. 2005 May;33(2):172-83
16075837
Psychon Bull Rev. 2003 Jun;10(2):289-318
12921410
Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Sep;8(3):600-8
11700912
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2000 Sep;129(3):399-418
11006907
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):433-47
17366310
Learn Behav. 2005 May;33(2):250-63
16075843
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2005 Sep;31(5):1105-20
16248753
Cogn Psychol. 2007 Feb;54(1):33-61
16764849
Psychol Bull. 1993 Nov;114(3):435-48
8272465
Psychol Sci. 2006 Aug;17(8):715-20
16913955
Psychol Rev. 1984 Jan;91(1):112-49
6571422
Mem Cognit. 1992 Jul;20(4):356-73
1495398
Cogn Psychol. 1993 Jan;25(1):111-46
8425385
Psychol Rev. 2000 Apr;107(2):397-402
10789204
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 May;137(2):226-43
18473655
Psychol Rev. 2009 Oct;116(4):661-716
19839681
Psychol Sci. 2005 Nov;16(11):866-70
16262771
Psychol Rev. 2004 Apr;111(2):430-45
15065916
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2002 Oct;55(4):289-310
12350283
Mem Cognit. 1980 Sep;8(5):459-67
7442548