Decision Making
Information Board Task
Also called: information display board, process-tracing board, decision matrix task, hidden information choice task
Measure how people search a table of hidden values before an everyday choice: how many cells they open, how long they take, and whether they search option by option or feature by feature.
10-14 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 17
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
What it measures
Measures how people search for information before a choice (Payne, Bettman and Johnson, 1988). Each board is an everyday choice between 4 options on 4 features, with all 16 points hidden until a cell is opened, one at a time, and a percentage under each feature that says how much it counts. Every opening is recorded. The main score is the number of cells opened per board; scores also give the time to choose and Payne's search index, whether search runs option by option or feature by feature.
Constructs
- Information search
- Decision strategies
- Adaptive decision making
- Selective attention
- Effort and accuracy
Research uses
- Decision-making research
- Consumer and judgment research
- Aging and decision research
- Within-study group comparison
How the paradigm works
The information board task measures how people search for information before a choice, a method known as process tracing (Payne, 1976). Each board is an everyday choice, such as four bikes, between four options, A to D, on four features. Every option has points from 1 to 9 on each feature, hidden in its cell until the participant opens it, and a percentage under each feature says how much it counts. An option's score is its points, each weighted by its feature's percentage, and the participant earns the score of each option chosen. A click or tap opens a cell; opening another cell or clicking the open one closes it, so one cell is open at a time, as on the boards of Payne, Bettman and Johnson (1988). The participant opens as many cells as they like, in any order, and then chooses. There is no time limit.
More about the paradigm
Half the boards spread the weights evenly, each from 20% to 30%, and half let one feature lead with 55% to 70%, 8 of each as standard, in an order drawn for each session. The choices, features, weights and points were written for this test by a rule, and each board has one best option. A practice board and a check question on what a percentage means come first. The study decides what the points are worth, and the payment line says whether they are exchanged for money.
Every opening is saved with the times it opened and closed. The main score is the number of cells opened per board. Scores also give the time to choose, the search index, the share of cells seen, the time a cell stays open, the share of time on the feature that counts most, how unevenly time is spread over the options and over the features, reopened cells, the relative accuracy of the choices (1 for the best option, 0 on average for a random pick) and the search measures on each kind of board. The search index is option-wise moves minus feature-wise moves over their sum, from -1 for search feature by feature to 1 for search option by option (Payne, 1976). Böckenholt and Hynan (1994) showed that the index can mislead when search is random; on a board with as many options as features, as here, random search gives an index near 0.
In Payne, Bettman and Johnson's first experiment, 16 people chose among four gambles on boards opened with a mouse. When one outcome's probability led, they opened fewer boxes (23.82 against 28.90 per choice), spent more of their time on the most likely outcome (0.44 against 0.34) and searched more by outcome (search index -0.37 against -0.12), with about the same relative accuracy (0.56 against 0.54). Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Cells Openedcount
- Cells opened per board, counting every opening, averaged over the boards.
- Higher means more search before a choice
- Time to Choosems
- Median time from a board appearing to the choice.
- Informational
- Search Indexscore
- Option-wise moves minus feature-wise moves over their sum, from -1 to 1, averaged over boards with at least one such move.
- Positive means search option by option, negative feature by feature
- Share of Cells Seen%
- Share of the 16 cells opened at least once on a board, averaged over the boards.
- Higher means a fuller search
- Time per Openingms
- Time a cell stayed open per opening, averaged over the boards with an opening.
- Informational
- Time on the Leading Feature%
- Share of the time cells were open that went to the feature with the largest percentage.
- Higher means more attention to the feature that counts most
- Spread of Time over Optionsscore
- Variance of the shares of open time over the four options, averaged over the boards.
- Higher means more selective search over options
- Spread of Time over Featuresscore
- Variance of the shares of open time over the four features, averaged over the boards.
- Higher means more selective search over features
- Reopened Cells%
- Openings of a cell already opened on the same board, over all openings.
- Informational
- Relative Accuracyscore
- The chosen option's score above the mean of the four, over the best score above the mean: 1 for the best option, 0 on average for a random pick.
- Higher means choices closer to the best option
- Best Option Chosen%
- Share of boards on which the option with the highest score was chosen.
- Higher means more choices of the best option
- Cells Opened, Even Weightscount
- Cells opened per board on boards whose weights are spread evenly.
- Informational
- Cells Opened, One Feature Leadingcount
- Cells opened per board on boards where one feature counts 55% to 70%.
- Informational
- Search Index, Even Weightsscore
- The search index on boards whose weights are spread evenly.
- Positive means search option by option
- Search Index, One Feature Leadingscore
- The search index on boards where one feature leads.
- Positive means search option by option
- Time on the Leading Feature, Even Weights%
- Share of open time on the feature with the largest percentage, on boards whose weights are spread evenly.
- Informational
- Time on the Leading Feature, One Feature Leading%
- Share of open time on the leading feature, on boards where one feature leads.
- Informational
- Choices without Openingcount
- Boards on which an option was chosen without opening any cell.
- Informational
- Points Wonpoints
- The scores of the options chosen, added up over the boards.
- Informational
- Early Clickscount
- Clicks on a choice under 100 ms after a board appeared, not taken as choices.
- Lower is better
- Boardscount
- Scored boards played.
- Informational
- Check Correctflag
- 1 when the check question on what a feature's percentage means was answered correctly, 0 when not.
- 1 supports interpretation
Use and evidence
17 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 32% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 414 of 495 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 4 |
| 2024 | 3 |
| 2023 | 2 |
| 2022 | 4 |
| 2021 | 4 |
| 2020 | 2 |
| 2019 | 10 |
| 2018 | 3 |
| 2017 | 5 |
| 2016 | 5 |
| 2015 | 8 |
| 2014 | 2 |
| 2013 | 6 |
| 2012 | 6 |
| 2011 | 5 |
| 2010 | 7 |
| 2009 | 4 |
| 2008 | 7 |
| 2007 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 5 |
| 2003 | 1 |
| 2002 | 2 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2000 | 1 |
Use grade E
Fewer than 30 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 14
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Board
- An everyday choice between 4 options, A to D, on 4 features: 16 cells of points from 1 to 9, each hidden until it is opened. A percentage under each feature says how much it counts.
- Opening
- A click or tap opens a cell, and opening another or clicking it again closes it, so one cell is open at a time. Every opening is saved with its times.
- Weights
- Half the boards spread the weights evenly, each from 20% to 30%; half let one feature lead with 55% to 70%.
- Boards
- 8 of each kind (standard, 4 to 10), 16 boards, in an order drawn for each session. Each board has one best option.
- Points
- The participant earns the chosen option's score, its points weighted by the percentages. There is no time limit.
- Practice
- 1 board, then a check question on what a percentage means.
Payne, Bettman and Johnson used gambles, with probabilities as the weights and a mouse that opened a box on entering it. This test uses everyday choices of its own and opens cells by click or tap, so a cell stays open while a person thinks, and its scores are not on the source's scale. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: information_board_choice from the scored run, one per board. How much to open and in what order is the participant's strategy, so accuracy is not judged against chance. A run with fewer than half its planned boards is invalid and any other shortfall is flagged. Choices under 200 ms on at least half the boards invalidate. One option on at least 90% of the boards, choosing without opening a cell on at least half the boards, choices scoring below a random pick on average over at least 8 boards, and a wrong answer to the check question are flagged.
Why these rules
There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. Searching little and choosing by one feature are strategies the task measures, not errors, so they never invalidate. The best option falls on each letter by chance, so the same letter on nearly every board, choices made without looking, and choices that score below a random pick suggest the board was not used and are flagged. An answer under 200 ms is faster than a simple visual reaction, so it cannot reflect the item. Following response-time effort screening for untimed tests (Wise and Kong 2005), the session is invalid only when at least half the answers are that fast. A hidden tab adds its time to the board, so it is flagged.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Boards of each kind | 8 | 4 to 10 |
| Payment line | Hypothetical points (standard) | Hypothetical points (standard), The study pays for points |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Information Board Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Payne, Bettman & Johnson, 1988), with the standard settings (boards of each kind: 8; payment line: Hypothetical points). The main score was cells opened (cells opened per board, counting every opening, averaged over the boards).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 534-552. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.534Boards opened one box at a time, the measures of search, and more search by attribute when one weight leads.
- Payne, J. W. (1976). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 366-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90022-2The information board and the search index.
- Böckenholt, U., & Hynan, L. S. (1994). Caveats on a process-tracing measure and a remedy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7(2), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070203How the search index behaves when search is random.
Source papers
- Payne, Bettman and Johnson (1988), Experiment 1: 16 students, four gambles on four outcomes. With one probability leading, 23.82 boxes opened per choice against 28.90, a share of time on the most likely outcome of 0.44 against 0.34 and a search index of -0.37 against -0.12.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Information Board Task take?
About 10 to 14 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Cells Opened, Time to Choose, Search Index, Share of Cells Seen, Time per Opening, Time on the Leading Feature, Spread of Time over Options, Spread of Time over Features, Reopened Cells, Relative Accuracy, Best Option Chosen, Cells Opened, Even Weights, Cells Opened, One Feature Leading, Search Index, Even Weights, Search Index, One Feature Leading, Time on the Leading Feature, Even Weights, Time on the Leading Feature, One Feature Leading, Choices without Opening, Points Won, Early Clicks, Boards and Check Correct. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Information Board Task used in research?
17 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 32% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 414 of 495 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade E). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Information Board Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Boards of each kind (4 to 10) and payment line (Hypothetical points (standard), The study pays for points). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese, with its words in the same language. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.
Related tests