Literature DB >> 25164802

Homo heuristicus: why biased minds make better inferences.

Gerd Gigerenzer1, Henry Brighton.   

Abstract

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: (a) the discovery of less-is-more effects; (b) the study of the ecological rationality of heuristics, which examines in which environments a given strategy succeeds or fails, and why; (c) an advancement from vague labels to computational models of heuristics; (d) the development of a systematic theory of heuristics that identifies their building blocks and the evolved capacities they exploit, and views the cognitive system as relying on an "adaptive toolbox;" and (e) the development of an empirical methodology that accounts for individual differences, conducts competitive tests, and has provided evidence for people's adaptive use of heuristics. Homo heuristicus has a biased mind and ignores part of the available information, yet a biased mind can handle uncertainty more efficiently and robustly than an unbiased mind relying on more resource-intensive and general-purpose processing strategies.
Copyright © 2009 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision-making; Heuristics; Induction; Inferences; Rationality; Uncertainity

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 25164802     DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01006.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Top Cogn Sci        ISSN: 1756-8757


  95 in total

1.  Information search and decision making: effects of age and complexity on strategy use.

Authors:  Tara L Queen; Thomas M Hess; Gilda E Ennis; Keith Dowd; Daniel Grühn
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2012-06-04

2.  Top performers are not the most impressive when extreme performance indicates unreliability.

Authors:  Jerker Denrell; Chengwei Liu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Reconsidering "evidence" for fast-and-frugal heuristics.

Authors:  Benjamin E Hilbig
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

4.  Framing the debate on human-like framing effects in bonobos and chimpanzees: a comment on Krupenye et al. (2015).

Authors:  Patricia Kanngiesser; Jan K Woike
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  Five down, Absquatulated: crossword puzzle clues to how the mind works.

Authors:  Raymond S Nickerson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-04

6.  Risk-adjusted procedure tailoring leads to uniformly low complication rates in ventral and incisional hernia repair: a propensity score analysis and internal validation of classification criteria.

Authors:  U A Dietz; A Fleischhacker; S Menzel; U Klinge; C Jurowich; K Haas; P Heuschmann; C-T Germer; A Wiegering
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 4.739

7.  Keeping the patient in the center: Common challenges in the practice of shared decision making.

Authors:  Kimberly A Fisher; Andy S L Tan; Daniel D Matlock; Barry Saver; Kathleen M Mazor; Arwen H Pieterse
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2018-08-06

8.  Individual differences in use of the recognition heuristic are stable across time, choice objects, domains, and presentation formats.

Authors:  Martha Michalkiewicz; Edgar Erdfelder
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-04

9.  Limits in decision making arise from limits in memory retrieval.

Authors:  Gyslain Giguère; Bradley C Love
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-04-22       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 10.  Good judgments do not require complex cognition.

Authors:  Julian N Marewski; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Gerd Gigerenzer
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2009-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.