<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><span style='color:#1F497D'>Apologies for cross-postings.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><span style='color:#1F497D'> </span><b><span lang=EN-GB>Special Issue of the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><i><span style='font-size:6.0pt;line-height:150%'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><i>Call for Papers</i></b><b><i><span style='font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><i><span style='font-size:6.0pt;line-height:150%'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><span style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:150%'>Strategy Selection:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><span style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:150%'>A Theoretical and Methodological Challenge <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b>Deadline: January 31st, 2015</b><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><i>Guest editors:<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'>Julian N. Marewski (<a href="mailto:julian.marewski@unil.ch">julian.marewski@unil.ch</a>; <i>University of Lausanne</i>)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'>Arndt Bröder (broeder@uni-mannheim.de; <i>University of Mannheim</i>)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'>Andreas Glöckner (<a href="mailto:andreas.gloeckner@psych.uni-goettingen.de">andreas.gloeckner@psych.uni-goettingen.de</a>; <i>University of Göttingen</i>)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:center;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><i>Resident Editor:<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center;line-height:150%'>George Wright (University of Strathclyde; <a href="mailto:george.wright@strath.ac.uk">george.wright@strath.ac.uk</a>)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'>The <i>Journal of Behavioral Decision Making</i> will publish a special issue on a topic that poses a paramount stumbling block across different theoretical frameworks in the cognitive sciences, biology, economics, and beyond: <i>Strategy selection</i>, or the challenge of modeling the mechanisms that determine how humans and other agents choose among different behaviors.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'><b><i>Background: The Strategy Selection Problem<o:p></o:p></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'>Decision behavior is contingent on environmental and task demands, often in an adaptive manner. In multi-strategy approaches, such observed behavioral changes have been characterized as a selection between 'strategies', 'heuristics', 'production rules' or 'routines'<i> </i>(e.g., Anderson et al., 2004; Gigerenzer, Todd, and the ABC Research Group, 1999; Payne, Bettman & Johnson, 1993). Alternative single process approaches like ‘evidence accumulation models’ (e.g., Bhatia, 2013; Busemeyer & Townsend, 1993; Newell & Lee, 2011) or ‘parallel constraint satisfaction models’ (e.g., Holyoak & Simon, 1999; Glöckner & Betsch, 2008), conceptualize adaptivity as a change in process parameters, such as decision thresholds or connection weights. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'> Although a considerable amount of research has been devoted to identifying strategies and their component processes as well as their dependencies on task and environmental factors, there is still a shortage of precise models <b><i>how</i></b><i> </i>strategies are selected or parameters are adjusted. What are the meta-decision processes that allow for strategy selection or parameter adjustment and that do not require 'homunculus' arguments? How can they be modeled in a formal fashion? Do the models allow for predictions rather than post-hoc interpretations of behavior? <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'> The fundamental problem of strategy selection is not unique to the decision sciences, but similar questions emerge also in other domains of cognitive psychology and in biology, economics, and machine learning (e.g., Seth, Prescott, & Bryson, 2011). Hence, the problem is truly interdisciplinary, and cognitive psychology will benefit from solutions and theories in other disciplines (and vice versa).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'> Past attempts to solve the issue in decision research range from cost-benefit analyses (Beach & Mitchell, 1978), and reinforcement learning processes (Rieskamp & Otto, 2006) to cognitive affordances, shaped by environmental structure (Marewski & Schooler, 2010). In the alternative single process approaches attentional shifts and speed-accuracy tradeoffs (Busemeyer & Townsend, 1993) or multi-layered decision processes (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008) have been assumed. In neighboring disciplines such as biology, economics, and machine learning, the strategy selection problem is conceptualized in terms of action and operator selection or the setting of weights/utitities in rational deliberation. How do these different modeling approaches relate to each other conceptually, which ones are superior when it comes to predicting adaptive behavior, and what are adequate methodological approaches to test them?<b> </b>Despite the cross-discplinary prominence of the strategy selection problem, there is no consensus regarding these and many other important theoretical and methodological questions. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'><b><i>Aims of the Special Issue</i><o:p></o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;line-height:150%'> The special issue will not only present cutting-edge research and theoretical developments on the ‘selection challenge’, but also present a synopsis of the various theoretical approaches and foster exchange between them. In doing so, the special issue aims to provide an overview of the scholarly debates associated with this modeling challenge, and hopefully contribute to integrate the existing approaches into an overarching perspective<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='line-height:150%'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:justify;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><b><i>Submission Guidelines & Deadlines<o:p></o:p></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'>Papers submitted for inclusion in the special issue should contain original and unpublished work relevant to the strategy selection problem. While the special issue places an emphasis on empirical (e.g., experimental or observational) research that, ideally, makes use of formal methods (e.g., computer simulations and mathematical analysis), full consideration will also be given to purely theoretical contributions and comprehensive reviews. Manuscripts should be submitted electronically via email to one of the the guest editors in accordance with the JBDM guidelines. All submitted papers will be refereed for their methodological soundness, clarity of the presented results and conclusions, and the relevance of the submission for the special issue. The submission deadline for manuscripts is January 31st , 2015.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'>A more detailed version of this call for papers can be found on <span lang=EN-GB>the </span><a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0771"><span lang=EN-GB>JBDM website</span></a> at <a href="http://ow.ly/xPPtm"><span lang=EN-GB>http://ow.ly/xPPtm</span></a><span lang=EN-GB>. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:1.15pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:1.0cm;line-height:150%;text-autospace:none'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><i><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>References<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. <i>Psychological Review, 111</i>, 1036–1060.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. <i>Academy of Management Review, 3</i>, 439–449.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Bhatia, S. (2013). <a name="_GoBack"></a>Associations and the accumulation of preference. <i>Psychological Review</i>, <i>120</i>, 522-543.</span><span style='font-size:5.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. <i>Psychological Review, 100</i>, 432–459.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & the ABC Research Group. (1999). <i>Simple heuristics that make us smart.</i> New York, NY: Oxford University Press.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Glöckner, A., & Betsch, T. (2008). Modeling option and strategy choices with connectionist networks: Towards an integrative model of automatic and deliberate decision making. <i>Judgment and Decision Making, 3</i>, 215–228.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Holyoak, K. J., & Simon, D. (1999). Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction. <i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128</i>, 3-31.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Marewski, J. N., & Schooler, L. J. (2011). Cognitive niches: An ecological model of strategy selection. <i>Psychological Review, 118</i>, 393–437.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Newell, B. R., & Lee, M. (2011). The Right Tool for the Job? Comparing an Evidence Accumulation and a Naïve Strategy - Selection Model of Decision Making. <i>Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24</i>, 456–481. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). <i>The adaptive decision maker</i>. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span lang=IT style='font-size:9.0pt'>Rieskamp, J., & Otto, P. E. (2006). </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies. <i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135</i>, 207–236.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0cm;margin-left:35.45pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-35.45pt;text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Seth, A. K., Prescott, T. J., & Bryson, J. J. (Eds.) (2011). <i>Modelling Natural Action Selection</i>. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>