QTest 2.1: Quantitative testing of theories of binary choice using Bayesian inference

Zwilling, Christopher E.; Cavagnaro, Daniel R.; Regenwetter, Michel; Lim, Shiau Hong; Fields, Bryanna; Zhang, Yixin

doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2019.05.002

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second author, for a graduate student project on assessing the scientific merit of Barron and Ursino (2013), carried out the mathematical analysis and the order-constrained statistical analysis using the public domain software QT est (Regenwetter et al, 2014; Zwilling et al, 2019). Table A1 in Appendix A shows our reconstruction of the choice frequencies, based on Table 5 of Barron and Ursino (2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…domain software QTest (Regenwetter et al, 2014;Zwilling et al, 2019). Table A1 in Appendix A shows our reconstruction of the choice frequencies, based on Table 5 of Barron and Ursino (2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Substance Model: Figuring out the permissible choice probabilities according to the random preference model and, hence, the Substance Model, involves some mathematical work. While we give some specifics, we omit most of the details here (see, e.g., Guo & Regenwetter, 2014; Regenwetter & Cavagnaro, 2019; Regenwetter, Dana, & Davis-Stober, 2011; Regenwetter & Davis-Stober, 2012; Regenwetter et al, 2014; Regenwetter & Robinson, 2017; Zwilling et al, 2019, for detailed examples, related tutorials, and other useful pointers).…”

Section: Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tutorial: Nuisance or Substance? Leveraging Heterogeneity of Preferences

Regenwetter

Robinson

2019

Span. J. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychology and neighboring disciplines are currently consumed with a replication crisis. Recent work has shown that replication can have the unintended consequence of perpetuating unwarranted conclusions when repeating an incorrect line of scientific reasoning from one study to another. This tutorial shows how decision researchers can derive logically coherent predictions from their theory by keeping track of the heterogeneity of preference the theory permits, rather than dismissing such heterogeneity as a nuisance. As an illustration, we reanalyze data of Barron and Ursino (2013). By keeping track of the heterogeneity of preferences permitted by Cumulative Prospect Theory, we show how the analysis and conclusions of Barron and Ursino (2013) change. This tutorial is intended as a blue-print for graduate student projects that dig deeply into the merits of prior studies and/or that supplement replication studies with a quality check.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tutorial: Nuisance or Substance? Leveraging Heterogeneity of Preferences

Regenwetter

Robinson

2019

Span. J. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, decision making is necessarily quantum-like in the presence of irrationality. A future direction is to examine the hypothesized connection between quantum-like decision making and irrationality by using the QTEST framework [ 44 ]. For example, QTEST could be used to estimate how far simulated data fit a Bayesian model.…”

Section: The Bell–wigner Polytope Of Irrational Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Irrationality of Being in Two Minds

Dehdashti

Fell

Bruza

2020

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a general framework that allows irrational decision making to be theoretically investigated and simulated. Rationality in human decision making under uncertainty is normatively prescribed by the axioms of probability theory in order to maximize utility. However, substantial literature from psychology and cognitive science shows that human decisions regularly deviate from these axioms. Bistable probabilities are proposed as a principled and straight forward means for modeling (ir)rational decision making, which occurs when a decision maker is in “two minds”. We show that bistable probabilities can be formalized by positive-operator-valued projections in quantum mechanics. We found that (1) irrational decision making necessarily involves a wider spectrum of causal relationships than rational decision making, (2) the accessible information turns out to be greater in irrational decision making when compared to rational decision making, and (3) irrational decision making is quantum-like because it violates the Bell–Wigner polytope.

show abstract

“…The most restrictive version of the model, WE10 denotes the case when , and where we allow response errors at a rate not to exceed 10%. The WE models generalize the “supermajority specification” under the QTest framework of Regenwetter et al (2014) and Zwilling et al (2019). WE50 can also be viewed as an extension of “weak stochastic transitivity” (Davidson & Marschak, 1959) from binary forced choice to binary non-forced choice (allowing indifference or lack of preference).…”

Section: Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Aging and Tests of Rationality

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated whether older adults are more likely than younger adults to violate a foundational property of rational decision making, the axiom of transitive preference. Our experiment consisted of two groups, older (ages 60-75; 21 participants) and younger (ages 18-30; 20 participants) adults. We used Bayesian model selection to investigate whether individuals were better described via (transitive) weak order-based decision strategies or (possibly intransitive) lexicographic semiorder decision strategies. We found weak evidence for the hypothesis that older adults violate transitivity at a higher rate than younger adults. At the same time, a hierarchical Bayesian analysis suggests that, in this study, the distribution of decision strategies across individuals is similar for both older and younger adults.

show abstract

QTest 2.1: Quantitative testing of theories of binary choice using Bayesian inference

Cited by 18 publications

References 50 publications

Tutorial: Nuisance or Substance? Leveraging Heterogeneity of Preferences

Tutorial: Nuisance or Substance? Leveraging Heterogeneity of Preferences

On the Irrationality of Being in Two Minds

Cognitive Aging and Tests of Rationality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About