Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Heuristics Debate$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Mark Kelman

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780199755608

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755608.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 16 June 2019

Fast and Frugal School Objections to the Heuristics and Biases Program

Fast and Frugal School Objections to the Heuristics and Biases Program

Chapter:
(p.70) 4 Fast and Frugal School Objections to the Heuristics and Biases Program
Source:
The Heuristics Debate
Author(s):

Mark Kelman (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755608.003.0004

F&F theorists claim H&B theorists have merely exposed laboratory frailties in judgment and decision-making; the findings do not imply poor performance in natural environments. H&B experimenters purportedly often present problems in a cognitively intractable form rather than the more tractable form they would take in natural environments, and they often ask people to solve, through abstract methods, problems of no practical significance that formally resemble important problems that they solve without using formal logic. Moreover, at times, subjects will substitute a pay-off structure from the real-world variant of the “game” that resembles the “game” the experimenters have established with its own unfamiliar pay-off structure and, at other times, people will reinterpret the language of instructions they are given because they draw implications from the quasi-conversation with the experimenter that are not literally present. F&F scholars further believe that the heuristics that the H&B scholars have identified are both under-theorized—there is no adaptationist account of why any of the cognitive mechanisms they identify would have developed—and under-defined.

Keywords:   Gigerenzer, fast and frugal heuristics, critiques of heuristics and biases, cheater detection modules, probability matching, base rate neglect, domain specificity, frequentist data presentation, probabilistic data presentation, hot-hand, gambler’s fallacy, Gricean conversational norms

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .