Salience effects in information acquisition: No evidence for a top-down coherence influence.
Coherence
Decision making
Information search
Journal
Memory & cognition
ISSN: 1532-5946
Titre abrégé: Mem Cognit
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0357443
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2021
11 2021
Historique:
accepted:
08
05
2021
pubmed:
17
6
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
16
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Integrated Coherence-Based Decision and Search (iCodes) model proposed by Jekel et al. (Psychological Review, 125 (5), 744-768, 2018) formalizes both decision making and pre-decisional information search as coherence-maximization processes in an interactive network. Next to bottom-up attribute influences, the coherence of option information exerts a top-down influence on the search processes in this model, predicting the tendency to continue information search with the currently most attractive option. This hallmark "attraction search effect" (ASE) has been demonstrated in several studies. In three experiments with 250 participants altogether, a more subtle prediction of an extended version of iCodes including exogenous influence factors was tested: The salience of information is assumed to have both a direct (bottom-up) and an indirect (top-down) effect on search, the latter driven by the match between information valence and option attractiveness. The results of the experiments largely agree in (1) showing a strong ASE, (2) demonstrating a bottom-up salience effect on search, but (3) suggesting the absence of the hypothesized indirect top-down salience effect. Hence, only two of three model predictions were confirmed. Implications for various implementations of exogenous factors in the iCodes model are discussed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34133002
doi: 10.3758/s13421-021-01188-9
pii: 10.3758/s13421-021-01188-9
pmc: PMC8563519
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1537-1554Subventions
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : GL 632/5-1 and BR 2130/13-1
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Psychol Sci. 2018 Nov;29(11):1878-1889
pubmed: 30295569
Front Psychol. 2013 Dec 09;4:902
pubmed: 24367343
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2018 Mar;147(3):409-417
pubmed: 29355370
Elife. 2020 Nov 17;9:
pubmed: 33200982
Nat Neurosci. 2003 Dec;6(12):1317-22
pubmed: 14608360
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Sep;34(5):1055-75
pubmed: 18763891
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 Aug;137(3):471-94
pubmed: 18729711
J Vis. 2010 May 01;10(5):15
pubmed: 20616137
Front Psychol. 2012 Oct 01;3:335
pubmed: 23162481
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2012 Mar;139(3):532-42
pubmed: 22381940
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Jul;29(4):611-25
pubmed: 12924862
Nat Neurosci. 2010 Oct;13(10):1292-8
pubmed: 20835253
Can J Exp Psychol. 2014 Jun;68(2):97-110
pubmed: 24884389
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Jan;29(1):53-65
pubmed: 12549583
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Jun;4(6):634-645
pubmed: 32015490
Psychol Rev. 1993 Jul;100(3):432-59
pubmed: 8356185
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Aug 16;108(33):13852-7
pubmed: 21808009
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Sep;144(1):190-206
pubmed: 23845447
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Mar 31;112(13):4170-5
pubmed: 25775604
Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:629-51
pubmed: 11148320
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Oct 1;110(40):E3858-67
pubmed: 24019496
Front Psychol. 2012 Jun 13;3:193
pubmed: 22707945
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):225-37
pubmed: 19293088
Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Apr;11(2):343-52
pubmed: 15260204
Psychol Rev. 2018 Oct;125(5):744-768
pubmed: 29952587
Cognition. 2014 Dec;133(3):641-66
pubmed: 25243773
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2017 Aug;79(6):1615-1627
pubmed: 28547680