Dynamic Decision Making: Individual Attributes And Behavior in a Challenge Dice Game

Daniel W Mcallister,Darryl A Seale,Rebecca M Guidice

doi:10.5296/ber.v3i1.3207

Abstract

Adopting both experimental and individual differences approaches we study dynamic decision making using the Challenge Dice Game. Experimentally, this computer task offered subjects immediate feedback and the opportunity to modify their strategic behavior over time. Subjects were found to behave more aggressively than equilibrium predictions and failed to approach optimal play with experience. From the individual difference perspective, characteristics thought to explain behavior and performance in uncertain and risky decision contexts were compared to observed behavior and performance with mixed results. We conclude that existing psychological scales are imperfect and not necessarily strong predictors of behavior and performance in dynamic decision tasks.

Highlights

Much of the empirical research into judgment and decision making comes from the “heuristics and biases” tradition, which illustrates the dysfunctional consequences of adopting judgmental heuristics
We turn to results from the survey and look at relationships among individual differences, decision behavior, and performance observed in the Challenge Dice Game (CDG)
We examined the relationship between the three approaches to risky decision making and CDG performance

Summary

Introduction

Much of the empirical research into judgment and decision making comes from the “heuristics and biases” tradition, which illustrates the dysfunctional consequences of adopting judgmental heuristics. While this body of research has made important contributions to the field, a central criticism is that while judgment is a continuous and interactive process that enables decision makers (DMs) to cope with their environment, much of the research has focused on discrete incidents, often lacking any form of meaningful feedback. Dynamic decision making (DDM), appears well-positioned to further our understanding of judgment and decision behavior in continuous and interactive environments. The research paradigms on which these studies are based are often criticized as being overly complex, with (often) ambiguous feedback, lacking clearly delineated subject goals, and not amenable to analytical solution

Methods

Results

Conclusion