title: Perceptuo-motor, cognitive, and description-based decision-making seem equally good.
abstract: Classical studies suggest that high-level cognitive decisions (e.g., choosing between financial options) are suboptimal. In contrast, low-level decisions (e.g., choosing where to put your feet on a rocky ridge) appear near-optimal: the perception-cognition gap. Moreover, in classical tasks, people appear to put too much weight on unlikely events. In contrast, when people can learn through experience, they appear to put too little weight on unlikely events: the description-experience gap. We eliminated confounding factors and, contrary to what is commonly believed, found results suggesting that (i) the perception-cognition gap is illusory and due to differences in the way performance is assessed; (ii) the description-experience gap arises from the assumption that objective probabilities match subjective ones; (iii) people's ability to make decisions is better than the classical literature suggests; and (iv) differences between decision-makers are more important for predicting peoples' choices than differences between choice tasks.
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Jarvstad
authors.forename: Ulrike
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Hahn
authors.forename: Simon K
authors.initials: SK
authors.lastname: Rushton
authors.forename: Paul A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Warren
mesh_terms: D003071:Cognition / Q000502:physiology*; D003657:Decision Making / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning / Q000502:physiology; D016013:Likelihood Functions; D008960:Models, Psychological; D011336:Probability; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012107:Research Design
references.citation: J Vis. 2008 Mar 06;8(3):2.1-15
references.pmid: 18484808
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 Nov;17(11):981-8
references.pmid: 17176431
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Aug;12(8):291-7
references.pmid: 18614390
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2004 Aug;15(8):534-9
references.pmid: 15270998
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Jun 7;279(1736):2171-9
references.pmid: 22298845
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2011 Apr;18(2):377-84
references.pmid: 21327342
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 2004 Nov;130(6):959-88
references.pmid: 15535744
references.citation: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2003 Jul;20(7):1419-33
references.pmid: 12868646
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Dec;13(12):517-23
references.pmid: 19836292
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
references.pmid: 9176952
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Mar 16;107(11):5232-7
references.pmid: 20194768
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):225-37
references.pmid: 19293088
references.citation: Science. 1981 Jan 30;211(4481):453-8
references.pmid: 7455683
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2008 Jan;115(1):281-90
references.pmid: 18211205
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2009 Apr;20(4):473-9
references.pmid: 19399978
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Aug 7;278(1716):2325-32
references.pmid: 21208966
references.citation: Spat Vis. 2003;16(3-4):255-75
references.pmid: 12858951
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2012 Jun;23(6):589-97
references.pmid: 22555968
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2011 Jun 15;31(24):8822-31
references.pmid: 21677166
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1999 Feb;38(1):129-66
references.pmid: 10090801
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Apr 14;106(15):6088-93
references.pmid: 19332799
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2006 Apr;113(2):409-32
references.pmid: 16637767
references.citation: Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
references.pmid: 9176953
references.citation: J Vis. 2007 Sep 28;7(5):13.1-18
references.pmid: 18217853
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2009 Apr;116(2):439-53
references.pmid: 19348549
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2012 Apr;23(4):419-26
references.pmid: 22395127
references.citation: J Vis. 2009 Jan 23;9(1):31.1-16
references.pmid: 19271901
references.citation: Cognition. 2010 May;115(2):225-37
references.pmid: 20092816