MA, University of Cincinnati, 2017, Arts and Sciences: Psychology

Individuals are prone to making decisions that appear to be suboptimal or biased. The present study focused on two decision paradigms individuals have shown decision biases under specific conditions: omission neglect and temporal discounting. Omission neglect refers to insensitivity to information that is not presented overtly in the moment of decision-making. Temporal discounting is the observation that the subjective value of a reinforcer decreases with delays in the delivery of that reinforce. The present study was designed to assess the extent to which specific cognitive processes (such as executive function, working and long-term memory, and decision styles) modulate performance on these decision-making paradigms, and to evaluate if engaging in episodic simulation, a process where individuals are asked to imagine in concrete details the scenario under their consideration, is effective in de-biasing individuals. Participants attended one two-hour session and were administered omission neglect scenarios, temporal discounting trials, neuropsychological measures, and decision style questionnaires. For omission neglect, participants rated how important they consider various attributes to be with respect to a decision, both in the absence (Time1) and presence (Time2) of certain important additional attribute(s). Participants demonstrated omission neglect when they overrated the importance of core attributes when additional important attributes were not presented yet. In temporal discounting, participants were asked to provide a present value (e.g., $85 now) that they thought was roughly equal to the subjective value of a delayed reward (e.g., $100 available in a month). Omission neglect and temporal discounting were tested both in conditions of episodic simulation and without simulation. All participants showed omission neglect when data were averaged across all scenarios; 63% showed omission neglect in each of the four scenarios tested. A larger omission neglect (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Chung-Yiu Peter Chiu Ph.D. (Committee Chair); Quintino Mano Ph.D. (Committee Member); Paula Shear Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: Clinical Psychology

PhD, University of Cincinnati, 2011, Business: Business Administration

Research on the bias blind spot shows that people are less capable of identifying biases in their own judgment than in others. People generally believe that they are less susceptible to biases than their peers and average people. This dissertation investigates the self-other bias asymmetry with respect to omission neglect. Omission neglect refers to insensitivity to missing or unknown information. Results from bias blind spot research imply a potential relationship between the self-other asymmetry in bias belief and omission neglect. Research on bias correction suggests that people holding a higher degree of asymmetry in bias beliefs may be less likely to correct biases even when omissions are made noticeable. Ironically, consumers who believe that they are less vulnerable to omission neglect may be more susceptible to omission neglect. Consumers may be also less likely to correct their judgment even when omitted information is made noticeable. The goal of the dissertation is to develop debiasing techniques to debias omission neglect in order to improve consumer judgment and decision making. Corrective procedures are designed to debias omission neglect by means of reducing the bias blind spot. Prior to debiasing, two studies are designed to substantiate the assumption about the relationship between the bias blind spot and omission neglect. Study 1 demonstrates that people believe others are susceptible to omission neglect, but they themselves are not. Study 2 shows that higher self-other asymmetry predicts predict greater omission neglect and a decreased likelihood of judgment correction to a moderate position. Last, in study 3, we show that debiasing is most effective when the bias blind spot is most specifically related to omission neglect. However, only people in low need for cognitive closure are responsive to debiasing. Taken together, the studies show that the bias blind spot contributes to omission neglect and reduces responsiveness to debiasing.

Committee: Frank Kardes PhD (Committee Chair); Chung-Yiu Chiu PhD (Committee Member); James Kellaris PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Marketing