Failure to Detect Mismatches Between Intention and Outcome in a Simple Decision Task

by: Petter Johansson, Lars Hall, Sverker Sikstrom, Andreas Olsson

Science, Vol. 310, No. 5745. (07 October 2005), pp. 116-119.

View FullText article

DOI, HighWire, Pubmed, Hubmed, Science

Reviews [Write a review of this article]

There are no reviews of this article

Find related articles from these CiteULike users

stefanherzog, almostc, ezca, ACS-Basel (group)

Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

blindness, choice, choice_blindness, confabulation, decision, decision-making, intention, introspection, magic, making

Abstract

A fundamental assumption of theories of decision-making is that we detect mismatches between intention and outcome, adjust our behavior in the face of error, and adapt to changing circumstances. Is this always the case? We investigated the relation between intention, choice, and introspection. Participants made choices between presented face pairs on the basis of attractiveness, while we covertly manipulated the relationship between choice and outcome that they experienced. Participants failed to notice conspicuous mismatches between their intended choice and the outcome they were presented with, while nevertheless offering introspectively derived reasons for why they chose the way they did. We call this effect choice blindness.

@article{citeulike:346967, abstract = {A fundamental assumption of theories of decision-making is that we detect mismatches between intention and outcome, adjust our behavior in the face of error, and adapt to changing circumstances. Is this always the case? We investigated the relation between intention, choice, and introspection. Participants made choices between presented face pairs on the basis of attractiveness, while we covertly manipulated the relationship between choice and outcome that they experienced. Participants failed to notice conspicuous mismatches between their intended choice and the outcome they were presented with, while nevertheless offering introspectively derived reasons for why they chose the way they did. We call this effect choice blindness.}, author = {Johansson, Petter and Hall, Lars and Sikstrom, Sverker and Olsson, Andreas }, citeulike-article-id = {346967}, doi = {10.1126/science.1111709}, journal = {Science}, keywords = {decision-making, intention, introspection}, month = {October}, number = {5745}, pages = {116--119}, posted-at = {2005-10-10 16:51:43}, priority = {0}, title = {Failure to Detect Mismatches Between Intention and Outcome in a Simple Decision Task}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1111709}, volume = {310}, year = {2005} }

RIS record

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:346967 L3 - citeulike-article-id:346967 TI - Failure to Detect Mismatches Between Intention and Outcome in a Simple Decision Task JF - Science VL - 310 IS - 5745 SP - 116 EP - 119 N2 - A fundamental assumption of theories of decision-making is that we detect mismatches between intention and outcome, adjust our behavior in the face of error, and adapt to changing circumstances. Is this always the case? We investigated the relation between intention, choice, and introspection. Participants made choices between presented face pairs on the basis of attractiveness, while we covertly manipulated the relationship between choice and outcome that they experienced. Participants failed to notice conspicuous mismatches between their intended choice and the outcome they were presented with, while nevertheless offering introspectively derived reasons for why they chose the way they did. We call this effect choice blindness. KW - decision-making KW - intention KW - introspection AU - Johansson, Petter AU - Hall, Lars AU - Sikstrom, Sverker AU - Olsson, Andreas PY - 2005/10/07/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1111709 ER -

RIS BibTeX