In several conditions of a line length identification experiment, the
subjects' decision making strategies were systematically biased agains
t the responses on the edges of the stimulus range. When the range and
number of the stimuli were small, the bias caused the percentage of c
orrect responses to be highest in the center and lowest on the extreme
s of the range. Two general classes of decision rules that would expla
in these results are considered. The first class assumes that subjects
intend to adopt an optimal decision rule, but systematically misrepre
sent one or more parameters of the decision making context. The second
class assumes that subjects use a different measure of performance th
an the one assumed by the experimenter: instead of maximizing the chan
ces of a correct response, the subject attempts to minimize the expect
ed size of the response error (a ''fidelity criterion''). In a second
experiment, extended experience and feedback did not diminish the bias
effect, but explicitly penalizing all response errors equally, regard
less of their size, did reduce or eliminate it in some subjects. Both
results favor the fidelity criterion over the optimal rule.