The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity

Little is known about the interplay between affective and cognitive processes of decision making within the bounded rationality perspective, in particular for the debate on adaptive decision making and strategy selection. This gap in the knowledge is particularly important as affect and deliberation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Trujillo, C.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2018
País:Colombia
Institución:Universidad de los Andes
Repositorio:Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/47084
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/1992/47084
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Complementary role
Affect-based
Cognitive heuristics
Ambivalence and complexity
id CO_764d548c494e61ba7c23b409fe049ced
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/47084
network_acronym_str CO
network_name_str Colombia
repository_id_str
spelling The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexityTrujillo, C.Complementary roleAffect-basedCognitive heuristicsAmbivalence and complexityLittle is known about the interplay between affective and cognitive processes of decision making within the bounded rationality perspective, in particular for the debate on adaptive decision making and strategy selection. This gap in the knowledge is particularly important as affect and deliberation may direct preferences in opposite directions. How do decision makers solve such dissonance? In this paper, we address this question by exploring the use of integral affect as a choice heuristic in comparison with and in conjunction to ¿take the best,¿ and weighted addition of attributes (WADD). We operationalize theories of reliance on affect in choice through a "Take the emotionally best" algorithm. Its predictive power is experimentally tested against other models, including mixed-sequential cognitive/affective procedures. We find that individual decisions are better predicted by a sequential combination of "Take the emotionally best" and "Take the best" with a slight dominance of the former. Conditions of cognitive/affective ambivalence, low discrimination ability and high complexity provide the cognitive architecture where such blended choice strategies predict decisions more precisely. This implies that reliance on integral affect may precede the use of cognitive cues following an ecological rationality perspective rather than supporting a kind of competition between affect and cognition as implied in current literature.Facultad de Administración2020-10-01T16:53:30Z2020-10-01T16:53:30Z2018Artículo de revistainfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501http://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aaTexthttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1992/47084https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724instname:Universidad de los Andesreponame:Repositorio Institucional Sénecarepourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/reponame:Séneca: repositorio Uniandesinstname:Universidad de los Andesinstacron:Universidad de los AndesengAl consultar y hacer uso de este recurso, está aceptando las condiciones de uso establecidas por los autores.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf22022-06-02T14:03:33Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
title The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
spellingShingle The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
Trujillo, C.
Complementary role
Affect-based
Cognitive heuristics
Ambivalence and complexity
title_short The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
title_full The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
title_fullStr The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
title_full_unstemmed The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
title_sort The complementary role of affect-based and cognitive heuristics to make decisions under conditions of ambivalence and complexity
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Trujillo, C.
author Trujillo, C.
author_facet Trujillo, C.
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Complementary role
Affect-based
Cognitive heuristics
Ambivalence and complexity
topic Complementary role
Affect-based
Cognitive heuristics
Ambivalence and complexity
description Little is known about the interplay between affective and cognitive processes of decision making within the bounded rationality perspective, in particular for the debate on adaptive decision making and strategy selection. This gap in the knowledge is particularly important as affect and deliberation may direct preferences in opposite directions. How do decision makers solve such dissonance? In this paper, we address this question by exploring the use of integral affect as a choice heuristic in comparison with and in conjunction to ¿take the best,¿ and weighted addition of attributes (WADD). We operationalize theories of reliance on affect in choice through a "Take the emotionally best" algorithm. Its predictive power is experimentally tested against other models, including mixed-sequential cognitive/affective procedures. We find that individual decisions are better predicted by a sequential combination of "Take the emotionally best" and "Take the best" with a slight dominance of the former. Conditions of cognitive/affective ambivalence, low discrimination ability and high complexity provide the cognitive architecture where such blended choice strategies predict decisions more precisely. This implies that reliance on integral affect may precede the use of cognitive cues following an ecological rationality perspective rather than supporting a kind of competition between affect and cognition as implied in current literature.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018
2020-10-01T16:53:30Z
2020-10-01T16:53:30Z
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv Artículo de revista
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
Text
http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ART
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/1992/47084
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724
instname:Universidad de los Andes
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca
repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/
url http://hdl.handle.net/1992/47084
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0206724
identifier_str_mv instname:Universidad de los Andes
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca
repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Facultad de Administración
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Facultad de Administración
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
instname:Universidad de los Andes
instacron:Universidad de los Andes
instname_str Universidad de los Andes
instacron_str Universidad de los Andes
institution Universidad de los Andes
reponame_str Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
collection Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
_version_ 1825050601967321088
score 15,81155

Similares en LA Referencia