vix.ing · top · new · best · stats · spec

On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky.

1996/07/01 by Gerd Gigerenzer · 4 citations
Decision Sciences · Computer Science · #Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics #Forecasting Techniques and Applications #Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

paper · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.592

openalex publication_date 1996/07/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01

Abstract

the heuristics-and-biases approach to statistical reasoning is and is not about. At issue is the imposition of unnecessarily narrow norms of sound reasoning that are used to diagnose so-called cognitive illusions and the continuing reliance on vague heuristics that explain everything and nothing. D. Kahneman and A. Tversky (1996) incorrectly asserted that Gigerenzer simply claimed that frequency formats make all cognitive illusions disappear. In contrast, Gigerenzer has proposed and tested models that actually predict when frequency judgments are valid and when they are not. The issue is not whether or not. or how often, cognitive illusions disappear. The focus should be rather the construction of detailed models of cognitive processes that explain when and why they disappear. A postscript responds to Kahneman and Tversky's (1996) postscript. I welcome Kahneman and Tversky's (1996) reply to my critique (e.g., Gigerenzer, 1991, 1994; Gigerenzer & Murray, 1987) and hope this exchange will encourage a rethinking of research strategies. I emphasize research strategies, rather than specific empirical results or even explanations of those results, because I believe that this debate is fundamentally about what

Citations

Cited by