Lecture 10- Judgement bias 1 Flashcards
what are heuristics according to the Adaptive critique Gigerenzer et al., 1999
part of rational though
Ecologically-rational thinking that serves our needs to function in our environment
Underpinned by ‘bounded rationality’ theory and notion of ‘satisficing’ (Simon, 1957)
*Basically, making the best of our cognitive (and external) limitations
uses k+t heuristics by saying can make them without pros and cons
what is bounded rationality - simon 1957
Theory about thinking given constraints (still survive rationally and do well )
People are essentially rational
e.g., we try to make logical decisions
Thinking is rational if it achieves personal goals yet doesn’t comply with logic
Cognitive constraints (e.g., limited working memory)
External constraints (e.g., lack of time)
‘Satisficing’: thinking that’s effective in terms of meeting goals but imperfect when evaluated against standards of logic
we can make do - certain critteria to make do = less time
what is the adaptive approach
K & T’s heuristics and biases approach too focused on probabilistic thinking
Evolutionary perspective (e.g., Cosmides & Tooby, 1994): frequency thinking ‘adaptive’
Frequencies more evident in real world
‘Hard-wired’ to think of things in terms of their frequency, so rationality being akin to logic largely unattainable (outside of laboratory only?)
describe Frequencies vs. probabilities
Gigerenzer et al. (e.g., 1999):
Cognitive biases ‘disappear’ when probabilistic information presented in frequency format
Study by Griffin and Buehler (1999):
No effect of information presentation format on base-rate data neglect biases
e.g., ‘planning fallacy’: task duration predictions no less underestimated (optimistically-biased) when judging likelihood of each task being completed on time or number of tasks finished promptly
describe fast and frugal heurristics
Gigerenzer et al. (1999): cognitive ‘toolbox’
Contents used to make effective judgements & decisions in natural (real-world) environments
Fast and frugal heuristics (e.g., ‘recognition’) good for dealing with uncertain situations
Rarely lead to bias (unlike K & T’s heuristics)
Serve everyday needs and goals
Evidence often from computer modelling of environmental cues
what does evidence form fast and frugal heuristica come from
Evidence often from computer modelling of environmental cues
describe how the juggement decison making in Giergenzers study isnt always error prone
JDM in uncertain conditions not always error-prone despite cognitive limitations
Correct (rational) judgements and decisions often made under very uncertain conditions
e.g., fire-fighters working under extreme time pressure to quell blaze
Can’t weigh-up possible courses of action to comply with logic standards
e.g., subjective expected utility theory
Under such conditions, judgements and decisions made on basis of quick mental simulation of possible event outcomes
‘Pros’ and ‘cons’ of task/situation
Person is ‘satisficing’ due to limited time and cognitive capacity
Same heuristic process used when task knowledge limited
e.g., predicting performance of sports teams
what is a recognition heuristic
Basis for judgements and decisions when knowledge limited (Gigerenzer et al., 1999)
Study (Ayton & Önkal,1997):
No effect of prior knowledge on accuracy of judgements of performance of English football teams
Judgements made by football-naïve Ps based on recognition heuristic?
Recognised major English cities, which also tend to have more successful football teams
Name a study on recognition heuristics
Study (Ayton & Önkal,1997):
No effect of prior knowledge on accuracy of judgements of performance of English football teams
Judgements made by football-naïve Ps based on recognition heuristic?
Recognised major English cities, which also tend to have more successful football teams
what id judgement decusuin making based on
JDM based on ‘recognition’ of relationship between ‘cues’ in environment
e.g., city size and football team’s success
describe recognition in JDM tasks
‘Recognition’: ecologically-rational JDM method when knowledge limited
Based on familiarity of things that predict topic
Real-world JDM uncertain, so answers unclear
‘Recognition’: not ‘quick-and-dirty’ strategy used due to ignorance of topic or task
describe some other ecological heuristics in giergenziers approach
Other ‘ecological’ heuristics:
‘Take-the-best’:
Using best cue (predictor or source of information ) from environment
e.g., unemployment and homelessness rates
‘Elimination-by-aspects’:
Choosing by discriminating among attributes
e.g., deciding which politician to vote for based on candidates’ stance on issues of interest
e.g., taxation, immigration, abortion, etc.
why was giergenziers approach revused
Original approach generally too descriptive
e.g., ‘availability’ used to describe how event-consistent information comes to mind
Cognitive mechanisms underlying heuristics need to be identified better through research
But, original approach spawned lots of work in psychology and beyond, so was good
describe Gilovich, Griffin & Kahneman’s (2002) revised approach to heuristics
Gilovich, Griffin & Kahneman’s (2002) book:
Review: 20 years of research since first book
Presented revised and strengthened approach
No longer just ‘cognitive miser’ approach
Heuristics more than just strategies to save cognitive effort when faced with uncertainty
Link between heuristics (and biases) and dual-process accounts of rational reasoning (e.g., Evans & Over, 1996; Sloman, 1996)
Reasoning deemed as being (normatively) non-rational often useful successfully in everyday life
e.g., meeting objectives (System 1 thinking)
what ar the 2 types of heuristics according to Kahneman & Frederick, 2002
‘Automatic’ and ‘deliberate’ heuristics
‘Choosing-by-liking
Choosing-by-default’:
