Suchergebnisse

The thirty-five chapters in this book describe various judgmental heuristics and the biases they produce, not only in laboratory experiments but in important social, medical, and political situations as well. Individual chapters discuss the representativeness and availability heuristics, problems in judging covariation and control, overconfidence, multistage inference, social perception, medical diagnosis, risk perception, and methods for correcting and improving judgments under uncertainty. About half of the chapters are edited versions of classic articles; the remaining chapters are newly written for this book. Most review multiple studies or entire subareas of research and application rather than describing single experimental studies. This book will be useful to a wide range of students and researchers, as well as to decision makers seeking to gain insight into their judgments and to improve them

Despite the extensive literature on citizens' use of cognitive heuristics in political settings, far less is known about how political elites use these shortcuts. Legislative elites benefit from the efficiency of the accessibility heuristic, but their judgments can also be flawed if accessible information is incomplete or unrepresentative. Using personal interviews and a quasi‐experimental design, this paper examines the use of the accessibility heuristic by professional legislative staff when assessing the importance of natural resources issues to their constituents. Staff members recall only a small subset of the relevant constituents in the district, and this subset is biased in favor of active and resource‐rich constituents over other, equally relevant constituents. This paper provides a new application of cognitive psychology to political elites and addresses important normative questions about the importance of information processing for political representation. By drawing on the psychology literature on heuristics, this paper identifies the cognitive mechanisms of congressional representation and provides new evidence of old biases.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to help interfirm-collaborating cluster (ICC) executives examine the relevance of alternative decision rules in practical business contexts. Multi-party-implemented strategies and establishing multi-lateral collaborations are necessary actions for achieving success in new product development by small and medium enterprises (SMEs). This study explores interfirm decision-making heuristics relating to industrial ICCs.Design/methodology/approach– The study examines the relevancy to decision making in ICCs of heurstics such as "fast-and-frugal decision trees" (FFDTs) and "take-the-best" (TTB) to processing possibly influential decision-making cues. The study also examines simple heuristics versus the value of a "fully rational" approach to making decisions – calculating cue values, importance weights, multiplying values by weights, summing and selecting the option having the highest summed score. This study included interviewing executives of the pivotal firm in an ICC.Findings– This study reveals a decision-making solution for shortening the time and processes required in seeking new business collaboration partners in an ICC. This study not only develops a FFDT for six decision-making modules to quickly identify potential collaboration partners, but it also constructs a decision systems analysis (DSA) flowchart to effectively shorten the decision-making process.Research limitations/implications– This study is in accordance with the general type of industrial interfirm collaboration in Taiwan. The industrial interfirm collaboration could be further divided into the types of formal, semi-formal and informal industrial interfirm collaborations.Practical implications– This study argues that firms usually find it difficult to develop their own technology because of the high costs of research and development for SMEs. Therefore, firms need to collaborate with partners to maintain their competitive advantage. However, to collaborate, firms must learn to trust their collaboration partners, and the degree of collaboration also strongly depends on the degree to which they trust their collaboration partners.Originality/value– This study provides the efficient models of FFDT and DSA to quickly identify potential collaboration partners and to effectively shorten decision-making processes.

AbstractTimothy Williamson has defended the claim that the semantics of the indicative 'if' is given by the material conditional. Putative counterexamples can be handled by better understanding the role played in our assessment of indicatives by a fallible cognitive heuristic, called the Suppositional Procedure. Williamson's Suppositional Conjecture has it that the Suppositional Procedure is humans' primary way of prospectively assessing conditionals. This paper raises some doubts on the Suppositional Procedure and Conjecture.