Advertisement

The experimenter module of the DSMAC (Dynamic Sequential MultiAttribute Choice) interface

  • Gad SaadEmail author
Cognitive Research

Abstract

The DSMAC (Dynamic Sequential MultiAttribute Choice) interface is a process-tracing methodology that permits a researcher to investigate subjects’ behaviors in an optional-stopping task. In such an environment, an individual decides after each piece of acquired information whether to make a choice between a pair of competing alternatives or to acquire additional information. DSMAC consists of two modules-an experimenter and a subject interface. The former allows the researcher to specify all of the relevant experimental parameters for a particular study, which is subsequently used as input by the latter. The bimodular nature of DSMAC significantly reduces the set-up time required for constructing novel stimuli for new experiments. DSMAC runs on a Macintosh computer. It is compatible with most Mactintosh models that use a system 7.0 (or higher) operating system. The source code was written in ThinkPascal 4.0.1.

Keywords

Acquisition Cost Experimental Task Binary Choice Attribute Difference Sequential Choice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aschenbrenner, K. M., Albert, D., &Schmalhofer, F. (1984). Stochastic choice heuristics.Acta Psychologica,56, 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aschenbrenner, K. M., Bockenholt, U., Albert, D., &Schmalhofer, F. (1986). The selection of dimensions when choosing between multiattribute alternatives. In R. W. Scholz (Ed.),Current issues in West German decision research (pp. 63–78). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
  3. Busemeyer, J. R., &Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment.Psychological Review,100, 432–459.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Diederich, A. (1995). A dynamic model for multi-attribute decision problems. In J.-P. Caverni, M. Bar-Hillel, F. H. Barron, & H. Jungermann (Eds.),Contributions to decision making-I (pp. 175–191). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  5. Hagerty, M. R., &Aaker, D. A. (1984). A normative model of consumer information processing.Marketing Science,3, 227–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Johnson, M. D., &Puto, C. P. (1987). A review of consumer judgment and choice. In M. J. Houston (Ed.),Review of marketing (pp. 236–292). Chicago: American Marketing Association.Google Scholar
  7. Saad, G. (1996). SMAC: An interface for investigating sequential multiattribute choices.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,28, 259–264.Google Scholar
  8. Saad, G. (1998a).Attribute acquisition and information integration in sequential choice. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  9. Saad, G. (1998b).Does dysphoria affect performance in a sequential multiattribute choice task? Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  10. Saad, G., &Boyle, P. (1998, July).When do experts close up shop: A study of the use of sequential information in a purchase decision. Paper to be presented at the Marketing Science Conference, Fontainebleau, France.Google Scholar
  11. Saad, G., &Russo, J. E. (1996). Stopping criteria in sequential choice.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,67, 258–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wald, A. (1947).Sequential analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Concordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations