These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
3. The multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator model of context effects in multialternative choice. Trueblood JS; Brown SD; Heathcote A Psychol Rev; 2014 Apr; 121(2):179-205. PubMed ID: 24730597 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. Roe RM; Busemeyer JR; Townsend JT Psychol Rev; 2001 Apr; 108(2):370-92. PubMed ID: 11381834 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Does the Superior Colliculus Control Perceptual Sensitivity or Choice Bias during Attention? Evidence from a Multialternative Decision Framework. Sridharan D; Steinmetz NA; Moore T; Knudsen EI J Neurosci; 2017 Jan; 37(3):480-511. PubMed ID: 28100734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Rigorously testing multialternative decision field theory against random utility models. Berkowitsch NA; Scheibehenne B; Rieskamp J J Exp Psychol Gen; 2014 Jun; 143(3):1331-48. PubMed ID: 24364681 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A decision network account of reasoning about other people's choices. Jern A; Kemp C Cognition; 2015 Sep; 142():12-38. PubMed ID: 26010559 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The causal psycho-logic of choice. Sloman SA; Hagmayer Y Trends Cogn Sci; 2006 Sep; 10(9):407-12. PubMed ID: 16899398 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A map of decoy influence in human multialternative choice. Dumbalska T; Li V; Tsetsos K; Summerfield C Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2020 Oct; 117(40):25169-25178. PubMed ID: 32958673 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Attraction Effect in Risky Choice Can Be Explained by Subjective Distance Between Choice Alternatives. Mohr PNC; Heekeren HR; Rieskamp J Sci Rep; 2017 Aug; 7(1):8942. PubMed ID: 28827699 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Multialternative drift-diffusion model predicts the relationship between visual fixations and choice in value-based decisions. Krajbich I; Rangel A Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2011 Aug; 108(33):13852-7. PubMed ID: 21808009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Decision makers conceive of their choices as interventions. Hagmayer Y; Sloman SA J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 Feb; 138(1):22-38. PubMed ID: 19203168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [A multi-measure analysis of the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects in multi-attribute decision making]. Tsuzuki T; Matsui H; Kikuchi M Shinrigaku Kenkyu; 2012 Dec; 83(5):398-408. PubMed ID: 23379078 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The repulsion effect in preferential choice and its relation to perceptual choice. Spektor MS; Kellen D; Klauer KC Cognition; 2022 Aug; 225():105164. PubMed ID: 35596968 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Quantum Decision Theory in Simple Risky Choices. Favre M; Wittwer A; Heinimann HR; Yukalov VI; Sornette D PLoS One; 2016; 11(12):e0168045. PubMed ID: 27936217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Decoy effects in intertemporal and probabilistic choices the role of time pressure, immediacy, and certainty. Marini M; Paglieri F Behav Processes; 2019 May; 162():130-141. PubMed ID: 30849515 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Theoretical developments in decision field theory: comment on Tsetsos, Usher, and Chater (2010). Hotaling JM; Busemeyer JR; Li J Psychol Rev; 2010 Oct; 117(4):1294-8. PubMed ID: 21038981 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Game relativity: how context influences strategic decision making. Vlaev I; Chater N J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2006 Jan; 32(1):131-49. PubMed ID: 16478346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]