QTEST: Quantitative Testing of Theories of Binary Choice
This half-day workshop is aimed at graduate students, postdocs and faculty interested in learning about distribution-free models of binary choice: How to build them and how to test them. The format will combine a lecture with hand-on exercises. Attendees should bring a laptop with the QTEST software installed. While the workshop does not require prior reading, attendees will benefit from reading any or all of the papers (reprints at internal.psychology.illinois.edu/reprints/index.php?site_id=38) listed below.
Regenwetter, M., Davis-Stober, C.P., Lim, S.H., Cha, Y.-C., Guo, Y., Messner, W., Popova, A., and Zwilling, C. (2014). “QTEST: Quantitative Testing of Theories of Binary Choice.” Decision, 1,1, 2-34.
Regenwetter, M. Dana, J. & Davis-Stober, C. (2011). „Transitivity of Preferences.“ Psychological Review, 118, 684-688.
Brown, N. R., Davis-Stober, C.P., and Regenwetter, M. (2015). “Commentary: “Neural signatures of intransitive preferences” ” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.
Davis-Stober, C., Park, S., Brown, N. and Regenwetter, M. (2016). “Reported violations of rationality may be aggregation artifacts.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
Guo, Y. and Regenwetter, M. (2014).“Quantitative Tests of the Perceived Relative Argument Model: Comment on Loomes (2010).” Psychological Review, 121, 696-705.
Regenwetter, M., Cavagnaro, D., Popova, A., Guo, Y., Zwilling, C., Lim, S.H., Stevens, J.R. (in press). “Heterogeneity and Parsimony in Intertemporal Choice.” Decision.
Regenwetter, M. and Davis-Stober, C.P. (2012). „Behavioral Variability of Choices versus Structural Inconsistency of Preferences.“ Psychological Review, 119, 408-416.
Regenwetter, M. and Robinson, M. (in press). “The construct-behavior gap in behavioral decision research: A challenge beyond replicability.” Psychological Review.