What might judgment and decision making research be like if we took a Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing?
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2011, Vol 6, Issue 8
Abstract
Judgment and decision making research overwhelmingly uses null hypothesis significance testing as the basis for statistical inference. This article examines an alternative, Bayesian approach which emphasizes the choice between two competing hypotheses and quantifies the balance of evidence provided by the data—one consequence of which is that experimental results may be taken to strongly favour the null hypothesis. We apply a recently-developed “Bayesian t-test” to existing studies of the anchoring effect in judgment, and examine how the change in approach affects both the tone of hypothesis testing and the substantive conclusions that one draws. We compare the Bayesian approach with Fisherian and Neyman-Pearson testing, examining its relationship to conventional p-values, the influence of effect size, and the importance of prior beliefs about the likely state of nature. The results give a sense of how Bayesian hypothesis testing might be applied to judgment and decision making research, and of both the advantages and challenges that a shift to this approach would entail.
Authors and Affiliations
William J. Matthews
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677867
- DOI -
- Views 157
- Downloads 0
Moral pluralism on the trolley tracks: Different normative principles are used for different reasons in justifying moral judgments
The psychological correlates of utilitarian choices in sacrificial moral dilemmas are contentious. In the literature, some research (Greene, et al., 2001) suggested that utilitarianism requires analytic thinking while ot...
The price of not putting a price on love
We examine financial challenges of purchasing items that are readily-available yet symbolic of loving relationships. Using weddings and funerals as case studies, we find that people indirectly pay to avoid taboo monetary...
Reducing the impact bias in judgments of post-decisional affect: Distraction or task interference?
People overestimate their affective reactions to future events and decisions — a phenomenon that has been termed “impact bias.” Evidence suggests that completing a diary detailing events contemporaneous with the focal on...
Can asymmetric subjective opportunity cost effect explain impatience in intertemporal choice? A replication study
In “The value of nothing: asymmetric attention to opportunity costs drives intertemporal decision making” Read, Olivola and Hardisty (2017) proposed an asymmetric subjective opportunity cost (ASOC) effect to explain and...
The effects of mental steps and compatibility on Bayesian reasoning
Four laboratory studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that correct Bayesian reasoning can be predicted by two factors of task complexity — the number of mental steps required to reach the normative solution, and...