Modeling Valuations From Experience: A Comment on Ashby and Rakow (2014).
What are the cognitive mechanisms underlying subjective valuations formed on the basis of sequential experiences of an option's possible outcomes? Ashby and Rakow (2014) have proposed a sliding window model (SWIM), according to which people's valuations represent the average of a limited sample of r...
| Published in: | Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory & Cognition Vol. 42; no. 1; pp. 158 - 167 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
American Psychological Association
Jan2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=112130055&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 112130055 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 02787393 EXL jtl: Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory & Cognition issn: 02787393 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jan2016 vid: 42 iid: 1 pid: 34 pub: American Psychological Association artinfo: ui: 112130055 10.1037/xlm0000165 ppf: 158 ppct: 9 formats: tig: atl: Modeling Valuations From Experience: A Comment on Ashby and Rakow (2014). aug: au: Wulff, Dirk U. Pachur, Thorsten affil: Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany su: Experience Individual differences Sampling (Process) Short-term memory Simulation methods & models Sequential analysis sug: subj: Experience Individual differences Sampling (Process) Short-term memory Simulation methods & models Sequential analysis keyword: active sampling cognitive modeling model complexity monetary gambles valuations from experience active sampling cognitive modeling model complexity monetary gambles valuations from experience ab: What are the cognitive mechanisms underlying subjective valuations formed on the basis of sequential experiences of an option's possible outcomes? Ashby and Rakow (2014) have proposed a sliding window model (SWIM), according to which people's valuations represent the average of a limited sample of recent experiences (the size of which is estimated by the model) formed after sampling has been terminated (i.e., an end-of-sequence process). Ashby and Rakow presented results from which they concluded, on the basis of model-selection criteria, that the SWIM performs well compared with alternative models (e.g., value-updating model, summary model). Further, they reported that the individual window sizes estimated by the SWIM correlated with a measure of working-memory capacity. In a reanalysis of the Ashby and Rakow data, we find no clear evidence in support of any of the models tested, and a slight advantage for the summary model. Further, we demonstrate that individual differences in the window-size estimated by the SWIM can reflect differences in noise. In computer simulations, we examine the more general question of how well the models tested by Ashby and Rakow can actually be discriminated. The results reveal that the models' ability to fit data depends on a complex interplay of noise and the sample size of outcomes on which a valuation response is based. This can critically influence model performance and conclusions regarding the underlying cognitive mechanisms. We discuss the implications of these findings and suggest ways of improving model comparisons in valuations from experience. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|