
Premium content
Access to this content requires a subscription. You must be a premium user to view this content.

Would you like to see your presentation here, made available to a global audience of researchers?
Add your own presentation or have us affordably record your next conference.
There has been considerable interest exploring how the utility of an outcome impacts the probability with which it is mentally simulated. Earlier studies using varying methodologies have yielded divergent conclusions with different directions of the influence. To directly examine such mental process, we employed a random generation paradigm in which all the outcomes were either equally (i.e., followed a uniform distribution) or unequally (i.e., a binomial distribution) probable. While our results revealed individual differences in how the utility influenced responses, the overall findings suggested that it is the outcomes' probabilities, not their utilities, that guide this process. Notably, an initial bias emerged, with individuals displaying a tendency to start with smaller values when all outcomes are equally likely. Our findings offer insights into the benefits of studying the mental sampling processes and provide empirical support for particular sampling models in this domain.
Authors:
Yun-Xiao Li: University of Warwick; Johanna Falben: University of Amsterdam; Lucas Castillo: University of Warwick; Jake Spicer: University of Warwick; Jian-Qiao Zhu: Princeton University; Nick Chater: University of Warwick; Adam Sanborn: University of Warwick
