Testing learning mechanisms of rule-based judgment.

Abstract

Weighing the importance of different pieces of information is a key determinant of making accurate judgments. In social judgment theory, these weighting processes have been successfully described with linear models. How people learn to make judgments has received less attention. Although the hitherto proposed delta learning rule can perfectly learn to solve linear problems, reanalyzing a previous experiment showed that it does not adequately describe human learning. To provide a more accurate description of learning processes we amended the delta learning rule with three learning mechanisms-a decay, an attentional learning mechanism, and a capacity limitation. An additional study tested the different learning mechanisms in predicting learning in linear judgment tasks. In this study, participants first learned to predict a continuous criterion based on four cues. To test the three learning mechanisms rigorously against each other, we changed the importance of the cues after 200 trials so that the mechanisms make different predictions with regard to how fast people adapt to the new environment. On average, judgment accuracy improved from Trial 1 to Trial 200, dropped when the task environment changed, but improved again until the end of the task. The capacity-restricted learning model, restricting how much people update the cue weights on a single trial, best described and predicted the learning curve of the majority of participants. Taken together, these results suggest that considering cognitive constraints within learning models may help to understand how humans learn when making inferences.

Measuring the mixture of rule-based and exemplar-based processes in judgment: A hierarchical Bayesian approach.

“…While the state-of-the-art Bayesian hierarchical approach improves upon problems of parameter estimation of the original RulEx-J model as a measurement model, the Bayesian framework used in this article also offers new possibilities to implement and then compare different model variants to answer theoretical questions. For instance, by incorporating a learning process (e.g., Hoffmann et al, 2019), adding possible contamination processes (e.g., Zeigenfuse & Lee, 2010), more complex rule-process or exemplar-process models (e.g., Izydorczyk & Bröder, 2021), integrating additional sources of information or covariates (e.g., mouse tracking, eye tracking, electroencephalogram [EEG]).…”

“…Based on Brunswik’s lens model (Brunswik, 1955), researchers assume that in rule-based processing, people combine and integrate cue information according to a learned rule (Hoffmann et al, 2019). This could, for instance, be a weighted linear additive rule (e.g., Brehmer, 1994; Juslin et al, 2003) or a simpler heuristic, which ignores part of the cue information.…”

What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow? modeling numerical judgments of realistic stimuli

“…Rule-based process models assume that people combine and integrate cue information according to some abstracted rule to make a judgment (Juslin, Olsson, & Olsson, 2003 ). The rule, according to which the information of multiple cues is integrated, is often assumed to be a linear additive function (Einhorn, Kleinmuntz & Kleinmuntz, 1979 ; Hoffmann, von Helversen, & Rieskamp , 2019 ; Juslin, Karlsson, & Olsson , 2008 ). Thus, the judgment of the rule module is generated by: where is the judged criterion of an object (the probe) based on the intercept and the cue weights for the corresponding cues.…”

Strategies of German Bundesliga and English Premier League clubs for the COVID-19 crisis: the case of international broadcasting fans

“…SJT suggests that individuals use a weighting process when evaluating an object (Hoffmann et al 2019 ), employing an attitudinal anchor to guide their categorization (Kyle et al 2004 ), and allocating the object toward a latitude of acceptance or rejection (Rhine and Severance 1970 ). Accordingly, individuals use legitimacy as a relevant classification variable when judging an object (Bitektine 2011 ).…”

“…BBC Sports, April 2020 "…footballers and clubs are on the receiving end of flak for the delays when it comes to voluntary salary reductions to help their fellow non-playing col-leagues…" Goal, April 2020 "The British Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, singled out Premier League footballers in a press conference on Thursday, calling on them to take pay cuts to help the economy during the coronavirus crisis…However, there are clubs like Tottenham Hotspur, who have put non-playing staff on furlough without reducing the wages of their players." Marca, April 2020 2 Theoretical background SJT suggests that individuals use a weighting process when evaluating an object (Hoffmann et al 2019), employing an attitudinal anchor to guide their categorization (Kyle et al 2004), and allocating the object toward a latitude of acceptance or rejection (Rhine and Severance 1970). Accordingly, individuals use legitimacy as a relevant classification variable when judging an object (Bitektine 2011).…”