The sunk cost fallacy is a well-established phenomenon where decision makers continue to commit resources, or escalate commitment, because of previously committed efforts, even when they have knowledge that their returns will not outweigh their investment. Most research on the sunk cost fallacy is done using hypothetical scenarios where participants make a single decision to continue with a project or to abandon it. This paradigm has several limitations and has resulted in a relatively limited understanding sunk cost behavior. To address some of these limitations, we created a dynamic repeated choice paradigm where sunk costs are learned over time and opportunity costs are explicit. Over three experiments we show that the sunk cost fallacy depends on the relative a priori importance of the goal being invested in. We observed escalation of commitment only when the sunk cost domain is more important than alternatives (explicit opportunity costs), and participants showed de-escalation of commitment to the sunk costs domain otherwise.

Research on complex problem solving (CPS) has reached a stage where certain standards have been achieved, whereas the future development is quite ambiguous. In this situation, the editors of the Journal of Dynamic Decision Making asked a number of representative authors to share their point of view with respect to seven questions about the relevance of (complex) problem solving as a research area, about the contribution of laboratory-based CPS research to solving real life problems, about the roles of knowledge, strategies, and intuition in CPS, and about the existence of expertise in CPS.

Research on complex problem solving (CPS) has reached a stage where certain standards have been achieved, whereas the future development is quite ambiguous. In this situation, the editors of the Journal of Dynamic Decision Making asked a number of representative authors to share their point of view with respect to seven questions about the relevance of (complex) problem solving as a research area, about the contribution of laboratory-based CPS research to solving real life problems, about the roles of knowledge, strategies, and intuition in CPS, and about the existence of expertise in CPS.

Decision making research has witnessed a growing number of studies on individual differences and decision making styles, yet the lack of comprehensive frameworks and widely accepted measures has hindered research for a long time. There is an ongoing debate on whether individuals’ styles dynamically change across time and situations according to circumstances. Furthermore, it is an open question whether these styles are mutually exclusive. Decision style measures seek to determine one's dominant style as well as less used styles. To our knowledge this is the first study of the convergent validity of two widely used decision making style measures: The Decision Style Inventory (DSI) and the General Decision Making Style (GDMS). The direction and strength of correlation between directive, analytical, conceptual and behavioral styles as measured by DSI and rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous styles as measured by GDMS have been tested. Results of the current study are compared with previous studies that have used one or both of the instruments. Correlations between styles are consistent with findings from other studies using one of the decision style measures, but the strength of correlations indicates that there is no convergent validity between DSI and GDMS.Decision making research has witnessed thrive of studies on individual differences and decision making styles, yet the lack of comprehensive frameworks and widely accepted measures has hindered research for a long time. Proponents of decision style research claim that individuals’ styles differ across time and situations denoting style dynamics. Decisions are dynamic as they change according to circumstances. Decision style measures seek to determine ones dominant style as well as other less used styles. There is ongoing debate whether these styles are mutually exclusive or dynamic. To our knowledge this is the first study of convergent validity of two of the most used decision making style measures: Decision Style Inventory and General Decision Making Style. The direction and strength of correlation between directive, analytical, conceptual and behavioral styles as measured by DSI and rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous styles as measured by GDSM have been tested. Results of the current study are compared with previous studies that have utilized both or one of the instruments. Correlations between styles are consistent with other studies, but the strength of correlation ascertains that there is no convergent validity between DSI and GDMS.

To handle complex technical operations, operators acquire skills in vocational training. Most of these skills are not used immediately but at some point later; this is called temporal transfer. Our previous research showed that cognitive abilities such as general mental ability (GMA) and memory are good predictors of temporal transfer. In addition to temporal transfer, operators also have to solve non-routine and abnormal upcoming problems using their skill set; this type of transfer is called adaptive transfer. Based on previous findings, it is assumed that GMA and memory will affect adaptive transfer as well. Thirty-three engineering students learned how to operate a complex technical system in normal operation with either a fixed or a contingent sequence. After two weeks, all participants had to adapt their learned skills to handle the adaptive transfer task, which was not initially trained. It was shown that high GMA positively predicted adaptive transfer, but no effect of memory was found. This implies that GMA is required to solve new complex tasks using a learned skill set. The findings are in line with studies that showed an effect of GMA on temporal transfer.

We are proud to announce the completion of our first volume 2015, which comprises a range of interesting findings about modelling, training, and assessing Dynamic Decision Making (DDM). These contributions to the first volume of the Journal of Dynamic Decision Making exemplify many relevant aspects of DDM as well as multiple perspectives that can be taken to investigate this multi-facetted phenomenon: Dutt and Gonzalez (2015) demonstrate the benefit of using process-data in decision modeling to explain both process and outcomes of DDM. Guss, Tuason and Orduna (2015) write about decision making in complex dynamic environments and investigated how performance can be predicted by observations of certain strategies, tactics, and errors. Kretzschmar and Sus (2015) present an extensive training study and found that training with multiple complex environments had positive effects on knowledge acquisition but not on knowledge application in a DDM transfer task. Hundertmark et al. (2015) report differential effects of cognitive ability on performance in different kinds of DDM tasks (e.g., effects are smaller in case of negative feedback), and Fischer and Neubert (2015) propose a model of problem solving competence (composed of knowledge, skills, abilities and other components) that explains what is required to handle complex dynamic environments. As editors, we are pleased by the breadth and quality of the initial contributions and thank the authors for supporting JDDM!

This study examined whether experience with different computer-based complex problem situations would improve complex problem solving (CPS) competence in an unknown problem situation. Therefore, university students (N = 110) took part in a control group study. They were trained in five different complex problem situations for up to 7 hr, and their performance was tested in a sixth complex problem situation. The data analyses revealed that the training influenced the CPS process of knowledge acquisition. However, the CPS process of knowledge application was not impacted by experience with other problem situations. Implications for the concept of CPS as a trainable competence as well as the training of CPS in general are discussed.

A new journal is starting with this page, and we – the editors – hope that this launch will be a successful one! Before we start with the normal course of the editorial business, let us explain why we made the decision to start a new journal.