Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:21:33.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ex ante coherence shifts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

Dan Simon Open the ORCID record for Dan Simon [Opens in a new window]  and
Keith J. Holyoak
Dan Simon
Affiliation:
Gould School of Law and Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, [email protected]://weblaw.usc.edu/faculty/?id=307
Keith J. Holyoak
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA90095-1563. [email protected]://www.psych.ucla.edu/faculty/page/kholyoak
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cushman characterizes rationalization as the inverse of rational reasoning, but this distinction is psychologically questionable. Coherence-based reasoning highlights a subtler form of bidirectionality: By distorting task attributes to make one course of action appear superior to its rivals, a patina of rationality is bestowed on the choice. This mechanism drives choice and action, rather than just following in their wake.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e47
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abelson, R. P. (1983) Whatever became of consistency theory? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 9:37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkowitz, L. & Devine, P. G. (1989) Research traditions, analysis, and synthesis in social psychological theories: The case of dissonance theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 15:493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brehm, J. W. (1956) Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 52(3):384–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brownstein, A. L. (2003) Biased predecision processing. Psychological Bulletin 129:545–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruner, J. (1957) Discussion. In: Contemporary approaches to cognition: A symposium held at the University of Colorado, ed. Bruner, J. S., pp. 151–56. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, K. A. & Russo, J. E. (2001) Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 7(2):91–103.Google ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, S. M., Yates, J. F., Preston, S. D. & Chen, L. (2016) Regulating emotions during difficult multiattribute decision making: The role of pre-decisional coherence shifting. PLOS ONE 11:e0150873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaxel, A. S., Russo, J. E. & Kerimi, N. (2013) Preference-driven biases in decision makers' information search and evaluation. Judgment and Decision Making 8(5):561–76.Google Scholar
Daniels, N. (2003) Reflective equilibrium. In: Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (fall 2018 edition), ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reflective-equilibrium/#pagetopright. (Online publication)Google Scholar
DeKay, M. L. (2015) Predecisional information distortion and the self-fulfilling prophecy of early preferences in choice. Current Directions in Psychological Science 24(5):405–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKay, M. L., Patiño-Echeverri, D. & Fischbeck, P. S. (2009) Distortion of probability and outcome information in risky decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 109(1):79–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, C. & Glöckner, A. (2013) Role-induced bias in court: An experimental analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 26(3):272–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Festinger, L. (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Festinger, L. (1964) Conflict, decision and dissonance. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Glöckner, A., Betsch, T. & Schindler, N. (2010) Coherence shifts in probabilistic inference tasks. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 23:439–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glöckner, A., Hilbig, B. E. & Jekel, M. (2014) What is adaptive about adaptive decision making? A parallel constraint satisfaction account. Cognition 133(3):641–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heider, F. (1979) On balance and attribution. In: Perspectives on social network research, ed. Holland, P. W. & Leinhardt, S., pp. 11–23. Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Powell, D. (2016) Deontological coherence: A framework for commonsense moral reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 142:1179–1203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holyoak, K. J. & Simon, D. (1999) Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 128:3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. (1989) Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science 13:295–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, I. L. & Mann, L. (1977) Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. Free Press.Google Scholar
Kostopoulou, O., Russo, J. E., Keenan, G., Delaney, B. C., Douiri, A. (2012) Information distortion in physicians' diagnostic judgments. Medical Decision Making 32:831–40. doi:10.1177/0272989X12447241CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981) An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I: An account of basic findings. Psychological Review 88:375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, S. J. & Simon, D. (2012) Parallel constraint satisfaction as a mechanism for cognitive consistency. In: Cognitive consistency: A fundamental principle in social cognition, ed. Gawronski, B. & Strack, F., pp. 66–86. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Read, S. J., Vanman, E. J. & Miller, L. C. (1997) Connectionism, parallel constraint satisfaction processes, and gestalt principles: (Re)introducing cognitive dynamics to social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review 1:26–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russo, J. E., Carlson, K. A., Meloy, M. G. & Yong, K. (2008) The goal of consistency as a cause of information distortion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137(3):456–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russo, J. E., Medvec, V. H. & Meloy, M. G. (1996) The distortion of information during decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66(1):102–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russo, J. E., Meloy, M. G. & Medvec, V. H. (1998) Predecisional distortion of product information. Journal of Marketing Research 35(4):438–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, D. (2004) A third view of the black box: Cognitive coherence in legal decision making. University of Chicago Law Review 71:511–86.Google Scholar
Simon, D. & Holyoak, K. J. (2002) Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency theories to constraint satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Review 6:283–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, D., Krawczyk, D. C. & Holyoak, K. J. (2004a) Construction of preferences by constraint satisfaction. Psychological Science 15:331–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, D., Pham, L. B., Le, Q. A. & Holyoak, K. J. (2001) The emergence of coherence over the course of decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27:1250–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, D., Snow, C. J. & Read, S. J. (2004b) The redux of cognitive consistency theories: Evidence judgments by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86:814–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, D. & Spiller, S. A. (2016) The elasticity of preferences. Psychological Science 27:1588–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, D., Stenstrom, D. M. & Read, S. J. (2015) The coherence effect: Blending cold and hot cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 109:369–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spellman, B. A., Ullman, J. B. & Holyoak, K. J. (1993) A coherence model of cognitive consistency. Journal of Social Issues 4:147–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. (1989) Explanatory coherence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12(3):435–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar