{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025056947608200455, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.780701754385965, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Performance in Tangible and in Cognitive Stock-Flow Tasks

Background. Most research in the area of dynamic decision making in general and stock-flow failures in particular is conducted with the help of computerized simulations as task environments or paper-based tasks of simple dynamic systems. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to investigate if stock-flow failures persist in naturalistic decision making environments. Methods. For this purpose, a tangible stock-flow experiment is used. It asks participants to meet a target level of water in a glass by pouring water through a funnel as fast as possible. We then compare their performance with a purely cognitive task (a manufacturing task). Results. Participants on average did not significantly perform better in a tangible stock-flow task than in a paper-based test of a comparable task. In addition, individual performance in the tangible task cannot be related to performance in a similar paper-pencil stock-flow task. Conclusions. An implication of this study is that tangible stock-flow tasks are as difficult for humans to control as are purely cognitive tasks. Further research should address individual differences between the two task modes (tangible vs. cognitive). A limitation of this study is the usage of only one tangible stock-flow task.