Six of one, half dozen of the other: Suboptimal prioritizing for equal and unequal alternatives.

It is possible to accomplish multiple goals when available resources are abundant, but when the tasks are difficult and resources are limited, it is better to focus on one task and complete it successfully than to divide your efforts and fail on both. Previous research has shown that people rarely a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Memory & Cognition Vol. 51; no. 2; pp. 486 - 504
Autores principales: James, Warren, Hunt, Amelia R., Clarke, Alasdair D. F.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=162057248&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 162057248
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0090502X
        MEG
      jtl: Memory & Cognition
      issn: 0090502X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2023
      vid: 51
      iid: 2
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        162057248
        10.3758/s13421-022-01356-5
      ppf: 486
      ppct: 18
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 2.5MB
      tig:
        atl: Six of one, half dozen of the other: Suboptimal prioritizing for equal and unequal alternatives.
      aug:
        au:
          James, Warren
          Hunt, Amelia R.
          Clarke, Alasdair D. F.
        affil:
          Centre for Health Data Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
          School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
          Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, UK
      su:
        Judgment (Psychology)
        Task performance
        Cognition
        Psychology
        Decision making
        Attention
        Resource allocation
        Employees' workload
        Reward (Psychology)
        Goal (Psychology)
        National competency-based educational tests
        Time
        Psychology of movement
        Conceptual models
        Reaction time
        Prompts (Psychology)
      sug:
        subj:
          Judgment (Psychology)
          Task performance
          Cognition
          Psychology
          Decision making
          Attention
          Resource allocation
          Employees' workload
          Reward (Psychology)
          Goal (Psychology)
          National competency-based educational tests
          Time
          Psychology of movement
          Conceptual models
          Reaction time
          Prompts (Psychology)
      keyword:
        Judgment
        Reasoning
        Judgment
        Reasoning
      ab: It is possible to accomplish multiple goals when available resources are abundant, but when the tasks are difficult and resources are limited, it is better to focus on one task and complete it successfully than to divide your efforts and fail on both. Previous research has shown that people rarely apply this logic when faced with prioritizing dilemmas. The pairs of tasks in previous research had equal utility, which according to some models, can disrupt decision-making. We investigated whether the equivalence of two tasks contributes to suboptimal decisions about how to prioritize them. If so, removing or manipulating the arbitrary nature of the decision between options should facilitate optimal decisions about whether to focus effort on one goal or divide effort over two. Across all three experiments, however, participants did not appropriately adjust their decisions with task difficulty. The only condition in which participants adopted a strategy that approached optimal was when they had voluntarily placed more reward on one task over the other. For the task that was more rewarded, choices were modified more effectively with task difficulty. However, participants were more likely to choose to distribute rewards equally than unequally. The results demonstrate that situations involving choices between options with equal utility are not avoided and are even slightly preferred over unequal options, despite unequal options having larger potential gains and leading to more effective prioritizing strategies.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N