Aba Szollosi
Eötvös Loránd University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Aba Szollosi.
Frontiers in Neuroscience | 2016
Zoltan Kekecs; Aba Szollosi; Bence Palfi; Barnabas Szaszi; Krisztina Kovács; Zoltan Dienes; Balazs Aczel
It has been proposed that evolution of dogs have led to a set of changes, which made them functionally similar to humans in some cognitive, behavioral, and social aspects (Topal et al., 2005; MacLean and Hare, 2015). Searching for these similarities, Nagasawa et al. (2015) hypothesize an oxytocin-mediated positive loop, which developed through the coevolution of human–dog bonding. To test this hypothesis, they conducted a highly original experiment, examining the effects of a 30-min human–dog interaction on oxytocin-secretion in both owners and dogs, and investigating which characteristics of the interaction modulated the oxytocin change (experiment 1). A unique feature of the study is that the same experiment was repeated with hand-reared wolves and their owners to evaluate whether the proposed oxytocin loop was specific to the human–dog interaction. In a following experiment (experiment 2), they administered oxytocin to dogs, and recoded changes in social behavior, and effects of the behavioral change on the owners urinary oxytocin levels.
Thinking & Reasoning | 2016
Balazs Aczel; Aba Szollosi; Bence Bago
ABSTRACT The general assumption that people fail to notice discrepancy between their answer and the normative answer in the conjunction fallacy task has been challenged by the theory of Logical Intuition. This theory suggests that people can detect the conflict between the heuristic and normative answers even if they do not always manage to inhibit their intuitive choice. This theory gained support from the finding that people report lower levels of confidence in their choice after they commit the conjunction fallacy compared to when their answer is not in conflict with logic. In four experiments we asked the participants to give probability estimations to the options of the conflict and no-conflict versions of the tasks in the original set-up of the experiment or in a three-option design. We found that participants perceive probabilities for the options of the conflict version less similar than for the no-conflict version. As people are less confident when choosing between more similar options, this similarity difference is proposed to serve as a mediator in the task in a way that the conflict and no-conflict conditions have their effects on confidence ratings through manipulating the similarity of the answer options.
Frontiers in Psychology | 2015
Balazs Aczel; Bence Bago; Aba Szollosi; Andrei Foldes; Bence Lukacs
The aim of this study was to initiate the exploration of debiasing methods applicable in real-life settings for achieving lasting improvement in decision making competence regarding multiple decision biases. Here, we tested the potentials of the analogical encoding method for decision debiasing. The advantage of this method is that it can foster the transfer from learning abstract principles to improving behavioral performance. For the purpose of the study, we devised an analogical debiasing technique for 10 biases (covariation detection, insensitivity to sample size, base rate neglect, regression to the mean, outcome bias, sunk cost fallacy, framing effect, anchoring bias, overconfidence bias, planning fallacy) and assessed the susceptibility of the participants (N = 154) to these biases before and 4 weeks after the training. We also compared the effect of the analogical training to the effect of ‘awareness training’ and a ‘no-training’ control group. Results suggested improved performance of the analogical training group only on tasks where the violations of statistical principles are measured. The interpretation of these findings require further investigation, yet it is possible that analogical training may be the most effective in the case of learning abstract concepts, such as statistical principles, which are otherwise difficult to master. The study encourages a systematic research of debiasing trainings and the development of intervention assessment methods to measure the endurance of behavior change in decision debiasing.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition | 2018
Balazs Aczel; Aba Szollosi; Bence Palfi; Barnabas Szaszi; Pascal J. Kieslich
In this study, we aimed to explore whether action execution is an inherent part of the decision-making process. According to the hypothesis of embodied choice, the decision-making process is bidirectional as action dynamics exert their backward influence on decision processes through changing the cost and value of the potential options. This influence takes place as moving toward one option increases the commitment to and, therefore, the likelihood of choosing that option. This commitment effect can be the result of either (a) the continuous act of getting closer to this option or (b) the increased movement cost associated with changing the movement direction to select a different option. To disentangle the potential influence of these two factors, we developed the Guided Movement Task, a choice task designed to bias participant’s computer-mouse movements by constraining the allowed movement space by a corridor. Using this task, we created different conditions in which the participants’ mouse cursor, after being guided toward one of the options, either had equal or unequal distances to the choice options. By this manipulation, we could test whether the continuous act of getting closer to an option in itself is sufficient to influence people’s decisions—a claim of “strong embodiment.” In two experiments, we found that the likelihood of choosing an option only increased when the distances between the two options were unequal after the initial movement but not when they were equal. These results disagree with the hypothesis that action execution is an inherent part of the decision-making process.
Frontiers in Psychology | 2015
Balazs Aczel; Bence Bago; Aba Szollosi; Andrei Foldes; Bence Lukacs
Frontiers in Psychology | 2015
Balazs Aczel; Bence Palfi; Barnabas Szaszi; Aba Szollosi; Zoltan Dienes
Judgment and Decision Making | 2018
Barnabas Szaszi; Bence Palfi; Aba Szollosi; Pascal J. Kieslich; Balazs Aczel
Archive | 2017
Balazs Aczel; Aba Szollosi; Bence Palfi; Szaszi Barnabas; Pascal J. Kieslich
Archive | 2017
Balazs Aczel; Aba Szollosi; Bence Bago
Cognitive Science | 2017
Bence Palfi; Aba Szollosi; Barnabas Szaszi; Marton Kovacs; Mark Zrubka; Peter Szecsi; Balazs Aczel; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers