Abstract:
Researchers in the decision making tradition usually analyze multiple decisions within experiments by aggregating
choices across individuals and using the individual subject as the unit of analysis. This approach can mask important
variations and patterns within the data. Specifically, it ignores variations in decisions across a task or game and possible
influences of characteristics of the subject or the experiment on these variations. We demonstrate, by reanalyzing data
from two previously published articles, how a mixed model analysis addresses these limitations. Our results, with a
modified Iowa gambling task and a prisoner’s dilemma game, illustrate the ways in which such an analysis can test
hypotheses not possible with other techniques, is more parsimonious, and is more likely to be faithful to theoretical
models.