PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 9, 2026Communications Psychology0 citationsOpen Access

Generated outcomes in risky choice reveal biased sampling and sequential dependencies

View Full Paper
JSJake SpicerUniversity of WarwickYLYun-Xiao LiUniversity of WarwickLCLucas CastilloUniversity of Warwick

Key Points

  • The research investigates how decision-making processes are influenced by sampling biases in risky choices.
  • Conducted two experiments with online samples (N=52, 51) involving generation tasks.
  • Participants produced outcomes from monetary gambles before making choices.
  • Analyzed the patterns of outcome generation and selection behaviors.
  • Found participants over-generated rarer outcomes and under-generated common ones.
  • Observed avoidance of direct repetitions in responses.
  • Participants favored choices with higher average utility, indicating influenced decision-making.

Abstract

Abstract Recent decision-making models have explained behaviour using mental sampling mechanisms, but there is still little agreement on the specific sampling process, such as whether sampling rates match true probabilities. Here, we seek to trace the sampling process using generation tasks: in two experiments using general online samples ( N s = 52, 51), participants repeatedly produced potential outcomes from pairs of monetary gambles before choosing between them. Results found over-generation of rarer outcomes and under-generation of common outcomes overall, but not in initial responses, as well as avoidance of direct repetitions. Participants also tended to select options with higher average utility across their responses, implying generations guided choice. These findings suggest systematic biases in the information people may consider before a choice, and the influence that this can have on subsequent decisions, carrying implications for mental sampling models of this behaviour. We thus suggest explicit generation is a valuable method to access underlying choice processes, offering new assessments of existing theories of decision making.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Spicer et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fed19ab9154b0b82878fb3https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-026-00467-y
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Mental Sampling in Preferential Choice: Tracing the Process using Random Generation2025
  2. 2Mental Sampling in Preferential Choice: Tracing the Process using Random Generation2025
  3. 3Random generation is what comes to mind in naturalistic settings2026
  4. 4The road not taken: Selective sampling and persisting inaccurate impressions2024
  5. 5The impact of distribution properties on sampling behavior2025