Much research in the last two decades has demonstrated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision making and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be interpreted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational (...) limitations, (3) the wrong norm being applied by the experimenter, and (4) a different construal of the task by the subject. In the debates about the viability of these alternative explanations, attention has been focused too narrowly on the modal response. In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, we have examined the implications of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap. Performance errors are a minor factor in the gap; computational limitations underlie non-normative responding on several tasks, particularly those that involve some type of cognitive decontextualization. Unexpected patterns of covariance can suggest when the wrong norm is being applied to a task or when an alternative construal of the task should be considered appropriate. Key Words: biases; descriptive models; heuristics; individual differences; normative models; rationality; reasoning. (shrink)

This paper aims to briefly introduce the main idea behind the fuzzy approach and to identify the areas and problems encountered in the humanities that might profit from using this approach. Based on a short overview of selected applications of fuzzy in psychology we identify key areas in which the fuzzy approach has already been applied, and propose a list of general types of problems that the fuzzy approach may provide solutions for in psychology and the humanities in general. These (...) types of problems are illustrated using practical examples. The benefits and possible shortcomings of using the fuzzy approach compared to classical approaches in use today are discussed. The goal of this paper is to indicate areas in research and practice in the humanities, where modern mathematical tools—in this case linguistic fuzzy modeling—have already been used or might prove promising. (shrink)

The article focuses on the methodological specifics of qualitative sociological studies commissioned by public administration authorities (“the client”) which aim to provide solutions to specific problems defined by the client. In conducting this kind of study, the researcher is expected not only to describe and understand the existing state of affairs but also to provide a set of recommendations for amending it. The research terrain is not defined by the sociologist herself but basically by the client. This situation reveals a (...) series of methodological and epistemological issues. The article discusses some of them and proposes that the research strategy of heuristic investigation may be an answer to the associated dilemmas. The author argues that the correct use of reflexive methodology can help the researcher to overcome the limits imposed on the research by the client’s presence and even make the apparent disadvantages work for her. (shrink)