Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality.Gerd Gigerenzer & Daniel Goldstein - 1996 - Psychological Review 103 (4):650-669.
    Humans and animals make inferences about the world under limited time and knowledge. In contrast, many models of rational inference treat the mind as a Laplacean Demon, equipped with unlimited time, knowledge, and computational might. Following H. Simon's notion of satisficing, the authors have proposed a family of algorithms based on a simple psychological mechanism: one-reason decision making. These fast and frugal algorithms violate fundamental tenets of classical rationality: They neither look up nor integrate all information. By computer simulation, the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   270 citations  
  • (1 other version)Homo Heuristicus: Why Biased Minds Make Better Inferences.Gerd Gigerenzer & Henry Brighton - 2009 - Topics in Cognitive Science 1 (1):107-143.
    Heuristics are efficient cognitive processes that ignore information. In contrast to the widely held view that less processing reduces accuracy, the study of heuristics shows that less information, computation, and time can in fact improve accuracy. We review the major progress made so far: the discovery of less-is-more effects; the study of the ecological rationality of heuristics, which examines in which environments a given strategy succeeds or fails, and why; an advancement from vague labels to computational models of heuristics; the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   164 citations  
  • Moral heuristics.Cass R. Sunstein - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):531-542.
    With respect to questions of fact, people use heuristics – mental short-cuts, or rules of thumb, that generally work well, but that also lead to systematic errors. People use moral heuristics too – moral short-cuts, or rules of thumb, that lead to mistaken and even absurd moral judgments. These judgments are highly relevant not only to morality, but to law and politics as well. Examples are given from a number of domains, including risk regulation, punishment, reproduction and sexuality, and the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   146 citations  
  • The misunderstood limits of folk science: an illusion of explanatory depth.Leonid Rozenblit & Frank Keil - 2002 - Cognitive Science 26 (5):521-562.
    People feel they understand complex phenomena with far greater precision, coherence, and depth than they really do; they are subject to an illusion—an illusion of explanatory depth. The illusion is far stronger for explanatory knowledge than many other kinds of knowledge, such as that for facts, procedures or narratives. The illusion for explanatory knowledge is most robust where the environment supports real‐time explanations with visible mechanisms. We demonstrate the illusion of depth with explanatory knowledge in Studies 1–6. Then we show (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   141 citations  
  • On the reality of cognitive illusions.Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky - 1996 - Psychological Review 103 (3):582-591.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   151 citations  
  • A unified theory of risk.Jaakko Hirvelä & Niall J. Paterson - forthcoming - Philosophical Quarterly.
    A novel theory of comparative risk is developed and defended. Extant theories are criticized for failing the tests of extensional and formal adequacy. A unified diagnosis is proposed: extant theories consider risk to be a univariable function, but risk is a multivariate function. According to the theory proposed, which we call the unified theory of risk, the riskiness of a proposition is a function of both the proportion and the modal closeness of the possible worlds at which the proposition holds. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic.Daniel G. Goldstein & Gerd Gigerenzer - 2002 - Psychological Review 109 (1):75-90.
    [Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 109 of Psychological Review. Due to circumstances that were beyond the control of the authors, the studies reported in "Models of Ecological Rationality: The Recognition Heuristic," by Daniel G. Goldstein and Gerd Gigerenzer overlap with studies reported in "The Recognition Heuristic: How Ignorance Makes Us Smart," by the same authors and with studies reported in "Inference From Ignorance: The Recognition Heuristic". In addition, Figure 3 in the Psychological Review article (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   121 citations  
  • Varieties of Risk.Philip A. Ebert, Martin Smith & Ian Durbach - 2020 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 101 (2):432-455.
    The notion of risk plays a central role in economics, finance, health, psychology, law and elsewhere, and is prevalent in managing challenges and resources in day-to-day life. In recent work, Duncan Pritchard (2015, 2016) has argued against the orthodox probabilistic conception of risk on which the risk of a hypothetical scenario is determined by how probable it is, and in favour of a modal conception on which the risk of a hypothetical scenario is determined by how modally close it is. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Epistemic Focal Bias.Mikkel Gerken - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (1):41-61.
    This paper defends strict invariantism against some philosophical and empirical data that have been taken to compromise it. The defence involves a combination of a priori philosophical arguments and empirically informed theorizing. The positive account of the data is an epistemic focal bias account that draws on cognitive psychology. It involves the assumption that, owing to limitations of the involved cognitive resources, intuitive judgments about knowledge ascriptions are generated by processing only a limited part of the available information—the part that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  • Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling?Emmanuel M. Pothos & Jerome R. Busemeyer - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):255-274.
    Classical (Bayesian) probability (CP) theory has led to an influential research tradition for modeling cognitive processes. Cognitive scientists have been trained to work with CP principles for so long that it is hard even to imagine alternative ways to formalize probabilities. However, in physics, quantum probability (QP) theory has been the dominant probabilistic approach for nearly 100 years. Could QP theory provide us with any advantages in cognitive modeling as well? Note first that both CP and QP theory share the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   58 citations  
  • Getting Real on Rationality—Behavioral Science, Nudging, and Public Policy.Andreas T. Schmidt - 2019 - Ethics 129 (4):511-543.
    The nudge approach seeks to improve people’s decisions through small changes in their choice environments. Nudge policies often work through psychological mechanisms that deviate from traditional notions of rationality. Because of that, some critics object that nudging treats people as irrational. Such treatment might be disrespectful in itself and might crowd out more empowering policies. I defend nudging against these objections. By defending a nonstandard, ecological model of rationality, I argue that nudging not only is compatible with rational agency but (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Reasoning under Scarcity.Jennifer M. Morton - 2017 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 95 (3):543-559.
    Practical deliberation consists in thinking about what to do. Such deliberation is deemed rational when it conforms to certain normative requirements. What is often ignored is the role that an agent's context can play in so-called ‘failures’ of rationality. In this paper, I use recent cognitive science research investigating the effects of resource-scarcity on decision-making and cognitive function to argue that context plays an important role in determining which norms should structure an agent's deliberation. This evidence undermines the view that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Nudge Versus Boost: How Coherent are Policy and Theory?Till Grüne-Yanoff & Ralph Hertwig - 2016 - Minds and Machines 26 (1-2):149-183.
    If citizens’ behavior threatens to harm others or seems not to be in their own interest, it is not uncommon for governments to attempt to change that behavior. Governmental policy makers can apply established tools from the governmental toolbox to this end. Alternatively, they can employ new tools that capitalize on the wealth of knowledge about human behavior and behavior change that has been accumulated in the behavioral sciences. Two contrasting approaches to behavior change are nudge policies and boost policies. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  • Objectivity in the Eye of the Beholder: Divergent Perceptions of Bias in Self Versus Others.Emily Pronin, Thomas Gilovich & Lee Ross - 2004 - Psychological Review 111 (3):781-799.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   73 citations  
  • From Libertarian Paternalism to Nudging—and Beyond.Adrien Barton & Till Grüne-Yanoff - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (3):341-359.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  • Probability, confirmation, and the conjunction fallacy.Vincenzo Crupi, Branden Fitelson & Katya Tentori - 2007 - Thinking and Reasoning 14 (2):182 – 199.
    The conjunction fallacy has been a key topic in debates on the rationality of human reasoning and its limitations. Despite extensive inquiry, however, the attempt to provide a satisfactory account of the phenomenon has proved challenging. Here we elaborate the suggestion (first discussed by Sides, Osherson, Bonini, & Viale, 2002) that in standard conjunction problems the fallacious probability judgements observed experimentally are typically guided by sound assessments of _confirmation_ relations, meant in terms of contemporary Bayesian confirmation theory. Our main formal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  • Generics and typicality: a bounded rationality approach.Robert van Rooij & Katrin Schulz - 2020 - Linguistics and Philosophy 43 (1):83-117.
    Cimpian et al. observed that we accept generic statements of the form ‘Gs are f’ on relatively weak evidence, but that if we are unfamiliar with group G and we learn a generic statement about it, we still treat it inferentially in a much stronger way: all Gs are f. This paper makes use of notions like ‘representativeness’, ‘contingency’ and ‘relative difference’ from psychology to provide a uniform semantics of generics that explains why people accept generics based on weak evidence. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Axiomatic rationality and ecological rationality.Gerd Gigerenzer - 2019 - Synthese 198 (4):3547-3564.
    Axiomatic rationality is defined in terms of conformity to abstract axioms. Savage limited axiomatic rationality to small worlds, that is, situations in which the exhaustive and mutually exclusive set of future states S and their consequences C are known. Others have interpreted axiomatic rationality as a categorical norm for how human beings should reason, arguing in addition that violations would lead to real costs such as money pumps. Yet a review of the literature shows little evidence that violations are actually (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Gigerenzer's normative critique of Kahneman and Tversky.Peter B. M. Vranas - 2000 - Cognition 76 (3):179-193.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Neuroeconomics: A Critical Reconsideration.Glenn W. Harrison - 2008 - Economics and Philosophy 24 (3):303-344.
    Understanding more about how the brain functionsshouldhelp us understand economic behaviour. But some would have us believe that it has done this already, and that insights from neuroscience have already provided insights in economics that we would not otherwise have. Much of this is just academic marketing hype, and to get down to substantive issues we need to identify that fluff for what it is. After we clear away the distractions, what is left? The answer is that a lot is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   39 citations  
  • Cognitive Success: A Consequentialist Account of Rationality in Cognition.Gerhard Schurz & Ralph Hertwig - 2019 - Topics in Cognitive Science 11 (1):7-36.
    One of the most discussed issues in psychology—presently and in the past—is how to define and measure the extent to which human cognition is rational. The rationality of human cognition is often evaluated in terms of normative standards based on a priori intuitions. Yet this approach has been challenged by two recent developments in psychology that we review in this article: ecological rationality and descriptivism. Going beyond these contributions, we consider it a good moment for psychologists and philosophers to join (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Dual Process Theories in Behavioral Economics and Neuroeconomics: a Critical Review.James D. Grayot - 2020 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 11 (1):105-136.
    Despite their popularity, dual process accounts of human reasoning and decision-making have come under intense scrutiny in recent years. Cognitive scientists and philosophers alike have come to question the theoretical foundations of the ‘standard view’ of dual process theory and have challenged the validity and relevance of evidence in support of it. Moreover, attempts to modify and refine dual process theory in light of these challenges have generated additional concerns about its applicability and refutability as a scientific theory. With these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • The conjunction fallacy: a misunderstanding about conjunction?Daniel Osherson - 2004 - Cognitive Science 28 (3):467-477.
    It is easy to construct pairs of sentences X, Y that lead many people to ascribe higher probability to the conjunction X-and-Y than to the conjuncts X, Y. Whether an error is thereby committed depends on reasoners’ interpretation of the expressions “probability” and “and.” We report two experiments designed to clarify the normative status of typical responses to conjunction problems. © 2004 Cognitive Science Society, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  • The whole truth about Linda: probability, verisimilitude and a paradox of conjunction.Gustavo Cevolani, Vincenzo Crupi & Roberto Festa - 2010 - In Marcello D'Agostino, Federico Laudisa, Giulio Giorello, Telmo Pievani & Corrado Sinigaglia (eds.), New Essays in Logic and Philosophy of Science. College Publications. pp. 603--615.
    We provide a 'verisimilitudinarian' analysis of the well-known Linda paradox or conjunction fallacy, i.e., the fact that most people judge the probability of the conjunctive statement "Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement" (B & F) as more probable than the isolated statement "Linda is a bank teller" (B), contrary to an uncontroversial principle of probability theory. The basic idea is that experimental participants may judge B & F a better hypothesis about Linda as compared (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Many Meanings of ‘Heuristic’.Sheldon J. Chow - 2015 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66 (4):977-1016.
    A survey of contemporary philosophical and scientific literatures reveals that different authors employ the term ‘heuristic’ in ways that deviate from, and are sometimes inconsistent with, one another. Given its widespread use in philosophy and cognitive science generally, it is striking that there appears to be little concern for a clear account of what phenomena heuristics pick out or refer to. In response, I consider several accounts of ‘heuristic’, and I draw a number of distinctions between different sorts of heuristics (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Can evolution get us off the hook? Evaluating the ecological defence of human rationality.Maarten Boudry, Michael Vlerick & Ryan McKay - 2015 - Consciousness and Cognition 33:524-535.
    This paper discusses the ecological case for epistemic innocence: does biased cognition have evolutionary benefits, and if so, does that exculpate human reasoners from irrationality? Proponents of ‘ecological rationality’ have challenged the bleak view of human reasoning emerging from research on biases and fallacies. If we approach the human mind as an adaptive toolbox, tailored to the structure of the environment, many alleged biases and fallacies turn out to be artefacts of narrow norms and artificial set-ups. However, we argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • The “Rationality Wars” in Psychology: Where They Are and Where They Could Go.Thomas Sturm - 2012 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 55 (1):66-81.
    Current psychology of human reasoning is divided into several different approaches. For instance, there is a major dispute over the question whether human beings are able to apply norms of the formal models of rationality such as rules of logic, or probability and decision theory, correctly. While researchers following the “heuristics and biases” approach argue that we deviate systematically from these norms, and so are perhaps deeply irrational, defenders of the “bounded rationality” approach think not only that the evidence for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories.James A. Hampton - 1998 - Cognition 65 (2-3):137-165.
    The adequacy of similarity to prototype as an account of categorization in natural concepts was assessed by analyzing the monotonicity of the relation between typicality of an item in a category and the probability of a positive categorization response using data from McCloskey and Glucksberg (1978). The analysis revealed a strong underlying similarity-based threshold curve, with systematic deviations. Further data collection showed that deviations from the curve could be attributed to the effects of unfamiliarity and non-categorial associations on typicality judgments, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • On the nature of the conjunction fallacy.Rodrigo Moro - 2009 - Synthese 171 (1):1 - 24.
    In a seminal work, Tversky and Kahneman showed that in some contexts people tend to believe that a conjunction of events (e.g., Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement) is more likely to occur than one of the conjuncts (e.g., Linda is a bank teller). This belief violates the conjunction rule in probability theory. Tversky and Kahneman called this phenomenon the “conjunction fallacy”. Since the discovery of the phenomenon in 1983, researchers in psychology and philosophy (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • Source Reliability and the Conjunction Fallacy.Andreas Jarvstad & Ulrike Hahn - 2011 - Cognitive Science 35 (4):682-711.
    Information generally comes from less than fully reliable sources. Rationality, it seems, requires that one take source reliability into account when reasoning on the basis of such information. Recently, Bovens and Hartmann (2003) proposed an account of the conjunction fallacy based on this idea. They show that, when statements in conjunction fallacy scenarios are perceived as coming from such sources, probability theory prescribes that the “fallacy” be committed in certain situations. Here, the empirical validity of their model was assessed. The (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • A puzzle about visualization.Peter Langland-Hassan - 2011 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (2):145-173.
    Visual imagination (or visualization) is peculiar in being both free, in that what we imagine is up to us, and useful to a wide variety of practical reasoning tasks. How can we rely upon our visualizations in practical reasoning if what we imagine is subject to our whims? The key to answering this puzzle, I argue, is to provide an account of what constrains the sequence in which the representations featured in visualization unfold—an account that is consistent with its freedom. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The Logic of Fast and Slow Thinking.Anthia Solaki, Francesco Berto & Sonja Smets - 2019 - Erkenntnis 86 (3):733-762.
    We present a framework for epistemic logic, modeling the logical aspects of System 1 and System 2 cognitive processes, as per dual process theories of reasoning. The framework combines non-normal worlds semantics with the techniques of Dynamic Epistemic Logic. It models non-logically-omniscient, but moderately rational agents: their System 1 makes fast sense of incoming information by integrating it on the basis of their background knowledge and beliefs. Their System 2 allows them to slowly, step-wise unpack some of the logical consequences (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Testing boundary conditions for the conjunction fallacy: Effects of response mode, conceptual focus, and problem type.Douglas H. Wedell & Rodrigo Moro - 2008 - Cognition 107 (1):105-136.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Exposing implicit biases and stereotypes in human and artificial intelligence: state of the art and challenges with a focus on gender.Ludovica Marinucci, Claudia Mazzuca & Aldo Gangemi - 2023 - AI and Society 38 (2):747-761.
    Biases in cognition are ubiquitous. Social psychologists suggested biases and stereotypes serve a multifarious set of cognitive goals, while at the same time stressing their potential harmfulness. Recently, biases and stereotypes became the purview of heated debates in the machine learning community too. Researchers and developers are becoming increasingly aware of the fact that some biases, like gender and race biases, are entrenched in the algorithms some AI applications rely upon. Here, taking into account several existing approaches that address the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The conjunction fallacy: a misunderstanding about conjunction?K. Tentori - 2004 - Cognitive Science 28 (3):467-477.
    It is easy to construct pairs of sentences X, Y that lead many people to ascribe higher probability to the conjunction X‐and‐Y than to the conjuncts X, Y. Whether an error is thereby committed depends on reasoners' interpretation of the expressions “probability” and “and.” We report two experiments designed to clarify the normative status of typical responses to conjunction problems.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Is Logic all in our Heads? From Naturalism to Psychologism.Francis J. Pelletier, Renée Elio & Philip Hanson - 2008 - Studia Logica 88 (1):3-66.
    Psychologism in logic is the doctrine that the semantic content of logical terms is in some way a feature of human psychology. We consider the historically influential version of the doctrine, Psychological Individualism, and the many counter-arguments to it. We then propose and assess various modifications to the doctrine that might allow it to avoid the classical objections. We call these Psychological Descriptivism, Teleological Cognitive Architecture, and Ideal Cognizers. These characterizations give some order to the wide range of modern views (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy.Thomas Boyer-Kassem, Sébastien Duchêne & Eric Guerci - 2016 - Theory and Decision 81 (4):479-510.
    Human agents happen to judge that a conjunction of two terms is more probable than one of the terms, in contradiction with the rules of classical probabilities—this is the conjunction fallacy. One of the most discussed accounts of this fallacy is currently the quantum-like explanation, which relies on models exploiting the mathematics of quantum mechanics. The aim of this paper is to investigate the empirical adequacy of major quantum-like models which represent beliefs with quantum states. We first argue that they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Toward an Ecological Theory of the Norms of Practical Deliberation.Jennifer M. Morton - 2010 - European Journal of Philosophy 19 (4):561-584.
    Abstract: Practical deliberation is deliberation concerning what to do governed by norms on intention (e.g. means-end coherence and consistency), which are taken to be a mark of rational deliberation. According to the theory of practical deliberation I develop in this paper we should think of the norms of rational practical deliberation ecologically: that is, the norms that constitute rational practical deliberation depend on the complex interaction between the psychological capacities of the agent in question and the agent's environment. I argue (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Natural frequencies improve Bayesian reasoning in simple and complex inference tasks.Ulrich Hoffrage, Stefan Krauss, Laura Martignon & Gerd Gigerenzer - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • More Thumbs Than Rules: Is Rationality an Exaptation?Antonio Mastrogiorgio, Teppo Felin, Stuart Kauffman & Mariano Mastrogiorgio - 2022 - Frontiers in Psychology 13.
    The literatures on bounded and ecological rationality are built on adaptationism—and its associated modular, cognitivist and computational paradigm—that does not address or explain the evolutionary origins of rationality. We argue that the adaptive mechanisms of evolution are not sufficient for explaining human rationality, and we posit that human rationality presents exaptive origins, where exaptations are traits evolved for other functions or no function at all, and later co-opted for new uses. We propose an embodied reconceptualization of rationality—embodied rationality—based on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Is the mind Bayesian? The case for agnosticism.Jean Baratgin & Guy Politzer - 2006 - Mind and Society 5 (1):1-38.
    This paper aims to make explicit the methodological conditions that should be satisfied for the Bayesian model to be used as a normative model of human probability judgment. After noticing the lack of a clear definition of Bayesianism in the psychological literature and the lack of justification for using it, a classic definition of subjective Bayesianism is recalled, based on the following three criteria: an epistemic criterion, a static coherence criterion and a dynamic coherence criterion. Then it is shown that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Sentences, Belief and Logical Omniscience, or What Does Deduction Tell Us?Rohit Parikh - 2008 - Review of Symbolic Logic 1 (4):459-476.
    We propose a model for belief which is free of presuppositions. Current models for belief suffer from two difficulties. One is the well known problem of logical omniscience which tends to follow from most models. But a more important one is the fact that most models do not even attempt to answer the question what it means for someone to believe something, and justwhatit is that is believed. We provide a flexible model which allows us to give meaning to beliefs (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • On the conjunction fallacy and the meaning of and, yet again: A reply to.Katya Tentori & Vincenzo Crupi - 2012 - Cognition 122 (2):123-134.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • The conjunction fallacy and the many meanings of and.Ralph Hertwig, Björn Benz & Stefan Krauss - 2008 - Cognition 108 (3):740-753.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • The uncertain reasoner: Bayes, logic, and rationality.Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (1):105-120.
    Human cognition requires coping with a complex and uncertain world. This suggests that dealing with uncertainty may be the central challenge for human reasoning. In Bayesian Rationality we argue that probability theory, the calculus of uncertainty, is the right framework in which to understand everyday reasoning. We also argue that probability theory explains behavior, even on experimental tasks that have been designed to probe people's logical reasoning abilities. Most commentators agree on the centrality of uncertainty; some suggest that there is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • How the conjunction fallacy is tied to probabilistic confirmation: Some remarks on Schupbach (2009).Katya Tentori & Vincenzo Crupi - 2012 - Synthese 184 (1):3-12.
    Crupi et al. (Think Reason 14:182–199, 2008) have recently advocated and partially worked out an account of the conjunction fallacy phenomenon based on the Bayesian notion of confirmation. In response, Schupbach (2009) presented a critical discussion as following from some novel experimental results. After providing a brief restatement and clarification of the meaning and scope of our original proposal, we will outline Schupbach’s results and discuss his interpretation thereof arguing that they do not actually undermine our point of view if (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Bounded rationality: the two cultures.Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos - 2014 - Journal of Economic Methodology 21 (4):361-374.
    Research on bounded rationality has two cultures, which I call ‘idealistic’ and ‘pragmatic’. Technically, the cultures differ on whether they build models based on normative axioms or empirical facts, assume that people's goal is to optimize or to satisfice, do not or do model psychological processes, let parameters vary freely or fix them, aim at explanation or prediction and test models from one or both cultures. Each culture tells a story about people's rationality. The story of the idealistic culture is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Content-blind norms, no norms, or good norms? A reply to Vranas.Gerd Gigerenzer - 2001 - Cognition 81 (1):93-103.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • A different conjunction fallacy.Nicolao Bonini, Katya Tentori & Daniel Osherson - 2004 - Mind and Language 19 (2):199–210.
    Because the conjunction pandq implies p, the value of a bet on pandq cannot exceed the value of a bet on p at the same stakes. We tested recognition of this principle in a betting paradigm that (a) discouraged misreading p as pandnotq, and (b) encouraged genuinely conjunctive reading of pandq. Frequent violations were nonetheless observed. The findings appear to discredit the idea that most people spontaneously integrate the logic of conjunction into their assessments of chance.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Many reasons or just one: How response mode affects reasoning in the conjunction problem.Ralph Hertwig Valerie M. Chase - 1998 - Thinking and Reasoning 4 (4):319 – 352.
    Forty years of experimentation on class inclusion and its probabilistic relatives have led to inconsistent results and conclusions about human reasoning. Recent research on the conjunction "fallacy" recapitulates this history. In contrast to previous results, we found that a majority of participants adhere to class inclusion in the classic Linda problem. We outline a theoretical framework that attributes the contradictory results to differences in statistical sophistication and to differences in response mode-whether participants are asked for probability estimates or ranks-and propose (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations