# data[].attributes.body
Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
Thinking helps produce new information and combining and restructuring existing knowledge to generate new knowledge. Decision Making  involves selecting one of the possible beliefs that is making a choice between alternatives which is closely linked to Thinking, because we cannot act unless we analyse first. Both processes cannot be directly observed, and involves large number of factors and their interactions, which cannot be possible without models.

This can be supported using Adaptive Decision-Maker Framework. It’s decision making strategies may be preferred when people are trying to avoid negative emotions associated with difficult choices. This helps apply to multi attributes and multi-alternatives. If a girl were to choose a dating partner with 4 options, she would be looking for the one with the attributes her ideal partner would have.

This was firstly proposed by Payne, Bettman and Johnson (1993). Proposed propositions, where people possess a toolbox of strategies that may be used in thinking and decision making tasks so they may use different strategies in different situations. Also proposed a strategy selection that was guided by 4 meta goals: WADD (giving a score of 1-5 in terms of attributes, in the end the highest score would be chosen), LEX (you would choose the most important strategy, attribute then see which one has the highest number), SAT (refers to making the best decision by achieving/fulfilling the minimum requirement instead of choosing best option) and Elimination by aspects

# data[].attributes.body
Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
The theory of reasoned action aims to explain the relationship between attitudes and behaviours when making choices, it considers two factors- attitudes and subjective norms. An attitude describes your individual perception of the behaviour while the subjective norm describes the perceived social pressure regarding this behaviour. Then, the theory of planned behaviour was made as an extension to theory of reasoned action, it introduced the third factor; perceived behavioral control. The third factor was added to account for situations in which attitude is positive, and when your subjective norm doesn’t prevent you from carrying out the behaviour, you just think you aren’t able to do it.

Albarracin et al (2001) conducted a meta-analysis of theory of planned behaviour and theory of reasoned action through condom use. Through these behavioural predictors of how many times people use condoms, it can be used to prevent HIV and STD epidemics. He fit both theories into the data set and estimated the predictive validity of the models. From this, Albarracin found that both theory of planned behaviour and theory of reasoned action successfully predicted condom use, the average correlation between intention and behaviour was 0.51. The intention-behaviour relationship was seen to be weaker for behaviours assessed prospectively compared to behaviours assessed retrospectively. The intention to use condoms appeared to derive from attitudes, subjective norms as well as perceived behavioural control- the three factors that are considered in the theories. Additionally, Godin and Kok (1996) explain to what extent the theory of planned behaviour can predict health-related behaviours. They carried out a systematic review of existing evidence on the theory, they used 56 research studies and established overall average correlations between; intention and attitudes being 0.4, intention and perceived social norms being 0.3, intention and perceived behavioural control being 0.4 and lastly intention and behaviour which was 0.4. It was deduced that the first three variables explained 30-45% in behavioural intention, so we can see how the theory of planned behaviour can explain around a third of variations in health-related behaviours. Overall, the theory of planned behaviour model provides a decent explanation of the observed variations.

# data[].attributes.body
Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
Explain one model of thinking and decision making

The function of thinking is to be able to modify information when received, we are able to break down information into lesser parts (analyse), bring different pieces of information together (synthesis), and relate certain pieces of information to certain categories (categorisation). While Decision making is a cognitive process that involves selecting one of the possible beliefs or actions, in other words choosing between alternatives. This process closely links to thinking as we have to analyse before we choose.

One model has been attempted to describe the way we think and how it affects our decision making. This model is the Normative model which assumes that there is unlimited time and resources available to make a decision. The model is able to define what is right and wrong, correct and incorrect, effective and ineffective.  This model of thinking is formal logic which was developed by Aristotle. It consists of a deductive syllogism: a combination of two premises and a conclusion. There is also a set of rules that describes when syllogisms are valid and when they are not. One example of this model put to use would be. Premise 1, all men are moral. Premise 2, all Greeks are men. We can therefore come to the conclusion that all greeks are mortal. This model of logic helps us get an insight to how humans think and decide.

Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
Firstly, thinking and decision making are both complex high order cognitive processes that are interdisciplinary. Thinking is described as modifying information, sorting through pieces and making conclusions/judgements. Decision making is said to include the process of thinking and is about selecting of the possible beliefs or actions, selecting an option from a wider range of others. As thinking and decision making involves taking into account a large number of factors and it cannot be observed directly, models are needed to try to explain thinking and decision making. One of the types of models that was proposed to explain these processes are descriptive models. In contrast to normative models, it takes a more in depth approach, explaining what people actually do when they think and make decisions.

An example of a descriptive model would be the Theory of Planned Behaviour. This theory is a further developed form of the theory of reasoned action, which was proposed by Martin Fishbein in 1967. The model tries to explain the relationship between attitudes and behaviours when making choices, focusing around the idea of behavioural intention. The model claims the factors, attitudes, subjective norms and perceived control play a role in behavioural intention, which later influences their future behaviour. Whether or not a person tries to carry out an action or certain behaviour, it will depend on what we expect the outcome to be. For example, subjective norms describe societal views and perspective on their intention or behaviour. Depending on the person’s situation the factor which they will regard as most important will vary.

Ajzen and Fishbein (1973) conducted a meta-analysis of published research provided evidence for the theory of planned behaviour, claiming that there is a 0.63 correlation between intentions and behaviour.

# data[].attributes.body
Please paste your answer here

# data[].attributes.body
Thinking and decision making are complex higher-order cognitive processes. As it is complex and unobservable, models are created in an attempt to explain the deviations of human thinking processes. One model of thinking and decision making is the theory of planned behavior (TPB), which is a macro-level cognitive model that proposes that future behaviour and actions are a result of behavioural intentions.

Behavioural intention is a predisposition caused by the belief that a particular behaviour will lead to a particular (desired) outcome. This is determined by 3 subjective beliefs: subject norms (one's perception of what is socially acceptable), attitude (positive/ negative perception of behaviour) and perceived behavioural control (whether it is something consciously controllable). In other words, according to TPB, if you believe a particular behaviour is socially acceptable, is something that can be achieved and your perception of the behaviour is positive, this would form a behavioural intention, which greatly increases your chances of performing a particular action.

One study that assesses the quality of TPB is Albarracin et al (2001), which is a meta-analysis of TPB as a model of condom use. The meta-analysis is performed through 96 data sets from 42 published and unpublished articles, where a single correlational matrix is formed to determine the predictive validity of TPB. Results from the study show that correlation between intention and behaviour is 0.51, and there is a significant correlation between behavioural intentions with subjective norms, attitude and perceived behavioural control. This is in accordance with TPB, as the only correlations observed should be between subjective beliefs and behavioural intentions, due to the one way nature of which TPB describes the thinking process. This shows that people are more likely to use condoms if there is an intention to do so, and such intentions appear to be derived from attitude, social norms and perceived behavioural control.

By measuring patterns of correlation of corresponding variables, one can quantify the extent of which observed correlational data matches theoretical predictions. This is expressed as the model’s predictive validity, which is a way to access the quality of a model. The study by Albarracin et al confirms the predictive validity of TPB in the context of condom use, and through its sophisticated correlational analysis, serves to increase our confidence in the theory of planned behaviour as a model of thinking and decision making.

# data[].attributes.body
Thinking is described as the cognitive process that allows humans to break down information into smaller parts, combine information and link related information. Decision making, on the other hand, is the cognitive process that involves selecting one option from a range of different choices available. These two cognitive processes can be represented with the use of models: The adaptive decision framework. However, with the use of a model, there is an issue that arises as models can’t be 100% tested and are not fully accurate.

The Adaptive decision framework (ADMF) proposed by Payne, Bettman and Johnson puts forward the idea that every human has a few strategies that they turn to before making a decision. These involve the Weighted additive strategy (WADD), Lexicographic strategy (LEX), Satisficing strategy (SAT) and elimination by aspects (EBA). WADD is the maximizing strategy and calculates the weighted sum. This strategy involves taking into account every attribute that is available. LEX in contrast only takes into account the most important attribute and ignoring all the others which in some cases does reduce the accuracy. SAT has a cut-off point for each attribute and the decision is made from all of the cut of points. EBA involves choosing the most important attribute and getting rid of all the other attributes that are not satisfactory. These four strategies can be divided into two groups: attribute-based (LEX and EBA) and alternative based (WADD and SAT). The only difference is that alternative based are more emotionally demanding. By showing that the ADMF has multiple strategies when it comes to decision making shows how decision making has to go through the process of going through each strategy.

This is shown through the study Luce, Bettman and Payne (1997) which hypothesized that negative emotion will result in decision-makers to evaluate their decisions to a larger extent. The results from this study showed that in high emotion group, people spent a longer time making the decision and opened more cells in the table which shows that they were trying to avoid negative emotions and chose strategies that save them from making decisions that were emotionally difficult.

# data[].attributes.body
The adaptive decision-maker framework is a model of thinking and decision making that was adapted to involve the importance of emotions and different goals when a person is making a decision. The Adaptive decision-maker framework sees every decision as a multi-attribute and multi-alternative decision problem, which means that when making different decisions, people tend to consider different pieces of information that determine their decisions. These different ways to make decisions are known as a toolbox of strategies, which each adapt to a different goal based on the context of the situation. The different strategies include ones such as the weighted additive strategy(WADD), which requires a large amount of effort but can mathematically calculate the benefits and disadvantages of a choice. There is also the elimination by aspects (EBA) method, which decides the most important attribute to a decision and eliminates all the options that don’t satisfy this attribute. Through this framework, people are presented with a toolbox of strategies that they might use depending on the situation and goal. In adaptive decision-maker framework, there are also 4 meta-goals, each prioritising a different aspect of the decision. For example, one of the meta-goals is to maximise the accuracy of a decision, which would mean that an individual focuses on every aspect of the decision, and would, therefore, use a strategy like WADD. In normative choice models, this is the only goal assumed, However, in this model, there are also other goals which focus on the emotional impact on decision making, which helps minimize the experience of negative emotion. Researches claim that negative emotions will have a direct impact on decision making and it must be considered in models, as humans will be less likely to make a decision that makes them feel negative emotions. However, it can also be said that negative emotions are external factors that negatively affect decision-making, but should not be included in the model. Thus, it is through the consideration of different attributes and different goals that the adaptive decision-maker model is able to represent the process of decision-making in humans.

# data[].attributes.body
Thinking and decision-making is a method of using experience and information to prepare, perceive the environment, and anticipate the future at large, whilst decision-making is the method of defining and choosing options based on the decision-maker's values and priorities. Payne, Bettman and Johnson 1993  conducted a micro-scale model which are models that focus on the temporary  decision-making process-Looks at what happens in an individual's mind when making a decision.

This model of thinking and decision making suggests that  individuals have a toolbox of strategies to use in different decision-making situations which require a choice of several approaches compared to several qualities and are as follows. Weighted addictive strategy- WADD, you have to calculate the weighted sum of attributes for each alternative and pick the alternative with the highest weighted sum. It is alternative-based and requires significant effort as you have to calculate the “utility of choice”. Lexicographic strategy-LEX is where you choose the most important attribute and the option with the best value on this attribute. It is attribute based but even though this strategy excludes a lot of important attributes, it is shown that in different conditions this strategy does come in helpful. It is not the most accurate out of all the strategies but is the least time-consuming. Satisfying strategy- SAT This alternative based strategy Identifies a cut-off point for each attribute and considers an alternative that meets the cut-off points for all attributes. And finally Elimination by aspects- EBA is when you choose the most important attribute and delete options that can not fulfil the attribute criteria. You usually then choose the second most important attribute and delete more options-Continue until only one choice is left.

Depending on which strategy is chosen, several factors come into play. Firstly maximising decision accuracy. Weighted addictive strategy would best suit this as it focuses on maximising the accuracy of the decision and thinks about all possible attributes to all possible options. Lexicographic strategy would best fit minimising cognitive effort because it is the most time-efficient. Minimising experience of negative emotion would be the Lexicographic strategy or Elimination by aspects as they avoid alternative-based strategies. And finally maximising ease of justification would be Satisfying strategy  and Elimination by aspects but it all depends on the context.