Description–experience Gaps: Assessments in Other Choice Paradigms

Abstract

Researchers have become increasingly interested in the descriptionexperience gap or the finding that people respond differently to the same quantitative information depending on whether it is described or experienced. Most studies on the gap have focused on binary choices between a safe option and a risky option and have compared decisions made from description alone versus experience alone. We review studies examining other decision-related phenomena-probability learning, the sunk-cost effect, choices in a repeated-trials prisoner's dilemma, and base-rate neglect-with an experience-based approach that often includes conditions combining description and experience. In probability learning, the sunk-cost effect and a repeated-trials prisoner's dilemma, participants come closer to behaving optimally when description and experience are simultaneously available than when experience alone is available. In studies of base-rate neglect, participants respond similarly under conditions of description alone and experience alone. Studies with nonhuman animals strengthen the generality of our conclusions regarding the sunk-cost effect and suggest a potential cause of base-rate neglect: a prior experience of having been rewarded for matching like items.

Incorporating conflicting descriptions into decisions from experience

“…In some cases, individuals might discount the experience, and give higher weights to descriptions. Decision-making biases originally found in descriptive paradigms are not always replicated in experiential paradigms, and in some instances reversals are observed (e.g., Barron & Erev, 2003;Fantino & Navarro, 2012;Hau et al, 2010). These decision-making biases have been widely explored in applications such as behavioral interventions, social marketing and governmental policy-making.…”

“…Alternatively, the discounting could be explained by the higher costs associated with processing descriptive information (Lejarraga, 2010). When presented with both descriptive and experiential information, individuals have to deal with competing sources of control (Fantino & Navarro, 2012). In addition, there is strong research evidence supporting the evolutionary adaptation of human-decision making to dynamic environments, which would justify the preference for experiential information because it reacts more quickly to changes in the environment (for a review, see .…”

“…For example, one such issue is how the two different sources of information are processed and integrated together when they are both available simultaneously. However, research on the description-experience gap also kept the two paradigms separate by presenting different participants with either description-only or experience-only tasks in isolation (for a review, see Fantino & Navarro, 2012).…”

“…The vast majority of human decision-making research to date has been based around descriptive paradigms (Camilleri & Newell, 2009;Fantino & Navarro, 2012;Rakow, Demes, & Newell, 2008). When participants make decisions based on descriptions, they gather information about the potential outcomes of their choices and associated probabilities by reading complete abstract descriptions of available options (e.g., Kahneman & Tversky, 1979;Tversky & Kahneman, 1992).…”

Optimal and Non-optimal Behavior Across Species

“…Would base-rate neglect still occur (in paper and pencil tasks, of course, participants are given the base rates and the case-cue accuracies). The difference in described contingencies and experienced contingencies is potentially profound (e.g., Fantino & Navarro, 2011). In order to investigate experienced base rates Stolarz- suggested using a modified matching-to-sample procedure as a base-rate analogue.…”