ABSTRACT

An experimental report by Platzer and Bröder ([2012]. Most people do not ignore salient invalid cues in memory-based decisions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 654–661) claimed that in memory-based decisions, salient attributes are often not ignored even if they are less valid than other cues. When the rank order of cue validities was congruent with their salience hierarchy, people predominantly used a noncompensatory take-the-best strategy (TTB) based on the most valid cue whereas they used more compensatory strategies when hierarchies were incongruent (i.e. the least valid cue was most salient). Given the recent replication crisis in psychology and methodological shortcomings of the original study, a better-controlled replication with new stimuli and a larger sample was conducted. A pilot study established a visual salience hierarchy of the cues used. The main experiment clearly replicated the salience effect at the strategy selection level and the longer response times for compensatory strategies compared to TTB. A response time interaction of strategy and condition did not replicate.

摘要

由普拉策和鲍德尔的实验报告（[2012]大多数人不基于内存的决定忽略突出无效线索。心理环境通报与评论，19（4），654–661）声称，在基于内存的决策中，即使显着属性的有效性不如其他线索，也常常会忽略它们。当提示有效性的等级顺序与其显着性等级一致时，人们主要根据最有效的提示使用非补偿性的最佳选择策略（TTB），而当层次结构不一致时（即效果最小的提示），他们会使用更多的补偿性策略。最突出）。考虑到最近在原始研究的心理学和方法学缺陷上存在复制危机，因此进行了更好控制的复制，其中包括新的刺激和较大的样本。一项初步研究建立了所使用提示的视觉显着性层次。与TTB相比，主要实验清楚地复制了策略选择级别的显着性效果，以及补偿策略的更长响应时间。策略和条件的响应时间交互未复制。