The role of mental simulation in causal decision making

The theoretical importance of alternative hypotheses in causal decision making has been recognized by several scholars (Dougherty, Gettys, & Thomas, 1997; Einhorn & Hogarth, 1986; Pennington & Hastie, 1992, 1993). However, empirical work on the subject to date paints an incomplete pictur...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author Niedermeier, Keith E
Format Dissertation
LanguageEnglish
Published ProQuest Dissertations & Theses 01.01.1999
Subjects
Cognitive psychology
Cognitive therapy
Decision making
Hypotheses
Social psychology
Studies
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The theoretical importance of alternative hypotheses in causal decision making has been recognized by several scholars (Dougherty, Gettys, & Thomas, 1997; Einhorn & Hogarth, 1986; Pennington & Hastie, 1992, 1993). However, empirical work on the subject to date paints an incomplete picture. The purpose of the present investigation was to explore how the presence and properties of alternative hypotheses can affect belief in a primary hypothesis. Four experiments were conducted in which participants acted as jurors in a case in which a bus company was being sued for killing a dog. Across experiments, participants generally ruled against the defendant less when they were able to mentally simulate an alternative explanation than when simulation was more difficult. In other words, the ability to simulate an alternative hypothesis reduced belief in the primary hypothesis.
ISBN:9780599376434
0599376430