Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Biases and Heuristics in Decision Making and Their Impact on Autonomy.J. S. Blumenthal-Barby - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (5):5-15.
    Cognitive scientists have identified a wide range of biases and heuristics in human decision making over the past few decades. Only recently have bioethicists begun to think seriously about the implications of these findings for topics such as agency, autonomy, and consent. This article aims to provide an overview of biases and heuristics that have been identified and a framework in which to think comprehensively about the impact of them on the exercise of autonomous decision making. I analyze the impact (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • Empathic forecasting: How do we predict other people's feelings?Monique Mh Pollmann & Catrin Finkenauer - 2009 - Cognition and Emotion 23 (5):978-1001.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Affective Forecasting and Its Implications for Medical Ethics.Rosamond Rhodes & James Strain - 2008 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 17 (1):54-65.
    Through a number of studies recently published in the psychology literature, T.D. Wilson, D.T. Gilbert, and others have demonstrated that our judgments about what our future mental states will be are contaminated by various distortions. Their studies distinguish a variety of different distortions, but they refer to them all with the generic term “affective forecasting.” The findings of their studies on normal volunteers are remarkably robust and, therefore, demonstrate that we are all vulnerable to the distortions of affective forecasting. a.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations