Journal of Dynamic Decision Making

About the Journal

The Journal of Dynamic Decision Making (JDDM) offers a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary open-access publication outlet for research on cognitive and behavioral processes involved in dynamic decision making. It is free of charge for both authors and readers. Contributions are expected primarily from the field of psychology but also from other disciplines like economics, philosophy, cognitive science, or system dynamics. Please refer to our Focus and Scope as well as our Author Guidelines, if you are interested in making a contribution to JDDM. For further information you may also refer to our first Editorial Statement.

 

Recent Articles

The impact of moral motives on economic decision-making
Katharina G. Kugler, Julia Reif, Gesa-Kristina Petersen, Felix C. Brodbeck
We examined the question of how “salient others” (i.e., social situations) influence economic decisions. We proposed that moral motives (which are mechanisms for relationship regulation) actively shape economic decisions in social situations. In an experiment (N = 94), we varied the decision situation (anonymous social one-shot interaction vs. non-anonymous social ongoing interaction vs. anonymous non-social one-shot interaction) and the moral motive (unity vs. proportionality). As hypothesized, moral motives influenced decision behavior only in social situations but not in non-social situations. In addition, we showed that in anonymous social one-shot situations (which are common situations for economic decisions), individuals are susceptible to situational moral motive framing (i.e., cues in the task description). In contrast, situational cues were ineffective if a moral motive was already established in the relationship between interacting partners. The results showed that moral motives matter in economic decision-making and that people infer information about morally “appropriate” behavior in anonymous social interactions from moral cues provided by the situation. The presented research offers a psychological explanation for why individuals make different decisions in economic decision situations depending on the social situation.
https://doi.org/10.11588/jddm.2021.1.77559

Supporting open access publishing in the field of dynamic decision making
Wolfgang Schoppek, Andreas Fischer, Joachim Funke, Daniel Holt, Alexander N. Wendt
In contrast to the successful previous year, 2020 turned out to be difficult, not only for the earth’s population due to COVID-19 but also for JDDM with an unusually small sixth volume. Looking back at these two very different years back-to-back led us to some reflection: As the COVID-19 pandemic forcefully illustrates, dynamic decision-making (DDM) with all its complications and uncertainty is a topic of high relevance for modern societies.
https://doi.org/10.11588/jddm.2021.1.82929

 

Jason Harman, Claudia Gonzalez-Valejjo, Jeffrey B. Vancouver
The sunk cost fallacy is a well-established phenomenon where decision makers continue to commit resources, or escalate commitment, because of previously committed efforts, even when they have knowledge that their returns will not outweigh their investment. Most research on the sunk cost fallacy is done using hypothetical scenarios where participants make a single decision to continue with a project or to abandon it. This paradigm has several limitations and has resulted in a relatively limited understanding sunk cost behavior. To address some of these limitations, we created a dynamic repeated choice paradigm where sunk costs are learned over time and opportunity costs are explicit. Over three experiments we show that the sunk cost fallacy depends on the relative a priori importance of the goal being invested in. We observed escalation of commitment only when the sunk cost domain is more important than alternatives (explicit opportunity costs), and participants showed de-escalation of commitment to the sunk costs domain otherwise.
 
Adapt or Exchange: Making changes within or between contexts in a modular plant scenario
Romy Müller, Leon Urbas
Most psychological studies investigating the balance between stability and flexibility in decision making use specific restrictions in their scenarios. These restrictions are likely to affect decision process, and it is unclear which of the findings can be transferred to more naturalistic decision contexts that call for a balance between stability and flexibility. Therefore, the present study used a scenario that is inspired by the problem structure found in a particular domain: Adapt/Exchange decisions in modular chemical plants. In this setting, we investigated whether participants engage in a thorough comparison of options and whether they perseverate on their previous choices when decision sequences increasingly favour one or the other option. The results ... (more)
JDDM doi: 10.11588/jddm.2020.1.69326 
 
On the future of complex problem solving: Seven questions, many answers?
Wolfgang Schoppek, Andreas Fischer, Joachim Funke, Daniel Holt
While research on complex problem solving (CPS) has reached a stage where certain standards have been achieved, the future development is quite ambiguous. Therefore, we were interested in the views of representative authors about the attainments and the future development of that field. We asked the authors to share their point of view with respect to seven questions about the relevance of (complex) problem solving as a research area, about the contribution of laboratory-based CPS research to solving real life problems, about the roles of knowledge, strategies, and intuition in CPS, and about the existence of expertise in CPS. (more)
JDDM doi: 10.11588/jddm.2019.1.69294 
 
 

Archive