A Dynamic Computational Model of Gaze and Choice in Multi-Attribute Decisions

被引:16
|
作者
Yang, Xiaozhi [1 ]
Krajbich, Ian [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Dept Psychol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Dept Econ, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
attention; decision making; eye-tracking; drift diffusion model; multi-attribute; SEQUENTIAL SAMPLING MODELS; DRIFT-DIFFUSION MODEL; EYE-TRACKING; VISUAL FIXATIONS; CROSS-VALIDATION; FIELD-THEORY; TIME-COURSE; ATTENTION; ALTERNATIVES; ATTRACTION;
D O I
10.1037/rev0000350
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
When making decisions, how people allocate their attention influences their choices. One empirical finding is that people are more likely to choose the option that they have looked at more. This relation has been formalized with the attentional drift-diffusion model (aDDM; Krajbich et al., 2010). However, options often have multiple attributes, and attention is also thought to govern the relative weighting of those attributes (Roe et al., 2001). Little is known about how these two distinct features of the choice process interact; we still lack a model (and tests of that model) that incorporate both option- and attribute-wise attention. Here, we propose a multi-attribute attentional drift-diffusion model (maaDDM) to account for attentional discount factors on both options and attributes. We then use five eye-tracking datasets (two-alternative, two-attribute preferential tasks) from different choice domains to test the model. We find very stable option-level and attribute-level attentional discount factors across datasets, though nonfixated options are consistently discounted more than nonfixated attributes. Additionally, we find that people generally discount the nonfixated attribute of the nonfixated option in a multiplicative way, and so that feature is consistently discounted the most. Finally, we also find that gaze allocation reflects attribute weights, with more gaze to higher-weighted attributes. In summary, our work uncovers an intricate interplay between attribute weights, gaze processes, and preferential choice.
引用
收藏
页码:52 / 70
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] VAMP (Voting Agent Model of Preferences): A computational model of individual multi-attribute choice
    Bergner, Anouk S.
    Oppenheimer, Daniel M.
    Detre, Greg
    [J]. COGNITION, 2019, 192
  • [2] Multi-attribute decisions in construction
    Peldschus, Friedel
    [J]. TRANSFORMATIONS IN BUSINESS & ECONOMICS, 2008, 7 (02): : 163 - 165
  • [3] A descriptive multi-attribute utility model for everyday decisions
    Weiss, Jie W.
    Weiss, David J.
    Edwards, Ward
    [J]. THEORY AND DECISION, 2010, 68 (1-2) : 101 - 114
  • [4] A descriptive multi-attribute utility model for everyday decisions
    Jie W. Weiss
    David J. Weiss
    Ward Edwards
    [J]. Theory and Decision, 2010, 68 : 101 - 114
  • [5] MULTI-ATTRIBUTE DECISIONS IN MARKETING BEHAVIOR
    GREEN, PE
    [J]. WHARTON QUARTERLY, 1972, 7 (01): : 47 - 51
  • [6] A mathematical model to optimize decisions to impact multi-attribute rankings
    Bougnol, M. L.
    Dula, J. H.
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 2013, 95 (02) : 785 - 796
  • [7] A multi-attribute utility model to optimise sow replacement decisions
    Huirne, RBM
    Hardaker, JB
    [J]. EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1998, 25 (04) : 488 - 505
  • [8] A mathematical model to optimize decisions to impact multi-attribute rankings
    M. L. Bougnol
    J. H. Dulá
    [J]. Scientometrics, 2013, 95 : 785 - 796
  • [9] Menopausal hormone therapy decisions: insights from a multi-attribute model
    Schapira, MM
    Gilligan, MA
    McAuliffe, TL
    Nattinger, AB
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2004, 52 (01) : 89 - 95
  • [10] MULTI-ATTRIBUTE UTILITY IN PAVEMENT REHABILITATION DECISIONS
    MOHAN, S
    BUSHNAK, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING-ASCE, 1985, 111 (04): : 426 - 440