IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/minsoc/v12y2013i2p263-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Re-assessing the Heuristics debate

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Polonioli

Abstract

[InlineMediaObject not available: see fulltext.] Mark Kelman’s recent book, The Heuristics Debate (HD), has two main goals. First, it seeks to reconstruct the controversy in decision science between Kahneman et al.’s heuristics-and-biases approach and Gigerenzer et al.’s fast-and-frugal heuristics approach. Second, it tries to discuss its implications for jurisprudence and policy-making. This study focuses on the first task only. The study attempts to show that, although HD has several important merits, its interpretation of the controversy misses some crucial aspects. Specifically, HD fails to appreciate that the debate is fundamentally about what a “rational” judgment is in the first place. Moreover, because of this, HD also fails to acknowledge the interplay between normative and methodological considerations. With regard to this aspect, HD’s treatment of the controversy fits into a long tradition. This study takes the opportunity to rectify the error. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Polonioli, 2013. "Re-assessing the Heuristics debate," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 12(2), pages 263-271, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:minsoc:v:12:y:2013:i:2:p:263-271
    DOI: 10.1007/s11299-013-0131-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11299-013-0131-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11299-013-0131-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gigerenzer, Gerd & Todd, Peter M. & ABC Research Group,, 2000. "Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195143812.
    2. Nathan Berg & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2010. "As-if behavioral economics: neoclassical economics in disguise?," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(1), pages 133-166.
    3. Nathan Berg & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2007. "Psychology Implies Paternalism? Bounded Rationality may Reduce the Rationale to Regulate Risk-Taking," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(2), pages 337-359, February.
    4. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226770895 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Erratum: Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 446(7131), pages 102-102, March.
    6. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 445(7126), pages 429-432, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berg, Nathan & Biele, Guido & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2010. "Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: Economists surveyed about PSA," MPRA Paper 26590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Berg, Nathan, 2010. "Behavioral Economics," MPRA Paper 26587, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Berg, Nathan, 2014. "Success from satisficing and imitation: Entrepreneurs' location choice and implications of heuristics for local economic development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1700-1709.
    4. Takashi Hotta & Kentaro Ueno & Yuya Hataji & Hika Kuroshima & Kazuo Fujita & Masanori Kohda, 2020. "Transitive inference in cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-13, August.
    5. Morris Altman, 2018. "Extending the theoretical lenses of behavioral economics through the sociological prisms of Gary Becker," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 45-51, March.
    6. Berg, Nathan & Prakhya, Srinivas & Ranganathan, Kavitha, 2018. "A satisficing approach to eliciting risk preferences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 127-140.
    7. Nathan Berg & Yuki Watanabe, 2020. "Conservation of behavioral diversity: on nudging, paternalism-induced monoculture, and the social value of heterogeneous beliefs and behavior," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 19(1), pages 103-120, June.
    8. Ivan D Chase & W Brent Lindquist, 2016. "The Fragility of Individual-Based Explanations of Social Hierarchies: A Test Using Animal Pecking Orders," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Julian N. Marewski & Rudiger F. Pohl & Oliver Vitouch, 2011. "Recognition-based judgments and decisions: What we have learned (so far)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(5), pages 359-380, July.
    10. Pere Mir-Artigues, 2022. "Combining preferences and heuristics in analysing consumer behaviour," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 523-543, September.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:5:p:359-380 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Lorenzo Esposito & Giuseppe Mastromatteo, 2024. "Behavioral economics and the nature of neoclassical paradigm," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 23(1), pages 45-78, December.
    13. Berg, Nathan & Kim, Jeong-Yoo, 2010. "Demand for Self Control: A model of Consumer Response to Programs and Products that Moderate Consumption," MPRA Paper 26593, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Martin Binder, 2014. "Should evolutionary economists embrace libertarian paternalism?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 515-539, July.
    15. Greg Jensen & Fabian Muñoz & Yelda Alkan & Vincent P Ferrera & Herbert S Terrace, 2015. "Implicit Value Updating Explains Transitive Inference Performance: The Betasort Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-27, September.
    16. Leonhard K. Lades & Liam Delaney, 2024. "Self-control failures, as judged by themselves," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Stephen A. Hillegeist & James P. Kavourakis & Matthew Pinnuck, 2023. "The association between quarter length, forecast errors, and firms’ voluntary disclosures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 1885-1918, June.
    18. Francetich, Alejandro & Kreps, David, 2020. "Choosing a good toolkit, II: Bayes-rule based heuristics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    19. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    20. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    21. Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2007. "Investment decisions, equivalent risk and bounded rationality," MPRA Paper 6073, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:minsoc:v:12:y:2013:i:2:p:263-271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.