Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Speed, Quality, and the Optimal Timing of Complex Decisions: Field Evidence

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2201.10808 v1 pith:RPUTVRZF submitted 2022-01-26 econ.GN cs.AIq-fin.ECstat.AP

Speed, Quality, and the Optimal Timing of Complex Decisions: Field Evidence

classification econ.GN cs.AIq-fin.ECstat.AP
keywords decisiondecisionsqualitychessinformationspeedtimingacquire
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper presents an empirical investigation of the relation between decision speed and decision quality for a real-world setting of cognitively-demanding decisions in which the timing of decisions is endogenous: professional chess. Move-by-move data provide exceptionally detailed and precise information about decision times and decision quality, based on a comparison of actual decisions to a computational benchmark of best moves constructed using the artificial intelligence of a chess engine. The results reveal that faster decisions are associated with better performance. The findings are consistent with the predictions of procedural decision models like drift-diffusion-models in which decision makers sequentially acquire information about decision alternatives with uncertain valuations.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. DeliChess: A Multi-party Dialogue Dataset for Deliberation in Chess Puzzle Solving

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DeliChess is a new dataset of group deliberation dialogues on chess puzzles showing that discussion improves collective accuracy.