Individual differences in reasoning and the heuristics and biases debate.

2004 ◽  
pp. 389-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith E. Stanovich ◽  
Richard F. West
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Heuristics And Biases

Gone with the wind: Individual differences in heuristics and biases undermine the implication of systematic irrationality

2000 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 673-674 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Funder
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Heuristics And Biases ◽  
Gone With The Wind ◽  
Human Thought

The target article's finding of stable and general individual differences in solving of problems in heuristics-and-biases experiments is fundamentally subversive to the Meliorist research program's attention-getting claim that human thought is “systematically irrational.” Since some people get these problems right, studies of heuristics and biases may reduce to repeated demonstrations that difficult questions are hard to solve.

scholarly journals Behavioral Operations Management: A Review of the Field

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa Hendijani
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Product Development ◽  
Inventory Management ◽  
New Product Development ◽  
Operations Management ◽  
New Product ◽  
Heuristics And Biases ◽  
Behavioral Operations ◽  
Behavioral Operations Management

Behavioral operations management (BOM) is one of the new areas in operations management. In the past 12 years, the field has made huge progress and researchers have become interested in this new perspective to solving operational problems. BOM is now one of the major subfields of operations management. In this paper, we examine and categorize areas of BOM based on the mainstream literature. Key areas include behavioral issues in new product development and project management, quality management, production management, inventory management, service operations, and forecasting. Studies in each area are divided into three subcategories, including OM context, individual attributes, heuristics, and biases, and individual differences. In OM context category, feedback and reward, training, work monitoring, teamwork and group decision making, goal setting, task assignment, and flexibility are among the main topics. In individual attributes, heuristics, and biases category, sunk cost effect and escalation of commitment, endowment effect, overprecision bias, planning fallacy, pull-to-center effect, anchoring and insufficient adjustment, and misperceptions of feedback are mainly discussed. In individual differences, analytic thinking and system thinking are mainly studied. New areas for research are suggested in each related section and are summarized in future directions and conclusion sections. In contexts such as new product development, project management, and inventory management, a shift to finding solution to performance improvement is beneficial instead of focusing on heuristics and biases and considering them as a deficiency in human decision making. Regarding individual differences category, a shift toward attributes other than cognitive abilities, such as global processing, creative thinking, and design thinking are recommended.

Definitions of Rationality in Philosophy, Cognitive Science, and Lay Discourse

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith E. Stanovich ◽  
Richard F. West ◽  
Maggie E. Toplak
Keyword(s):  
Probability Theory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Instrumental Rationality ◽  
Heuristics And Biases ◽  
Wide Range

Because rationality is an issue across many disciplines, it has acquired many different definitions. This chapter describes definitions of rationality from cognitive science that are amenable to a program of measuring individual differences. Definitions of both epistemic and instrumental rationality are described in terms in terms of axiomatic utility theory and probability theory. It is argued that the wide range of tasks investigated in the heuristics and biases literature captures most aspects of epistemic and instrumental rationality.

Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?

2000 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 645-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith E. Stanovich ◽  
Richard F. West
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Heuristics And Biases ◽  
Minor Factor ◽  
Performance Errors ◽  
Series Of Experiments ◽  
The Subject ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Behavior And Cognition

Much research in the last two decades has demonstrated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision making and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be interpreted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational limitations, (3) the wrong norm being applied by the experimenter, and (4) a different construal of the task by the subject. In the debates about the viability of these alternative explanations, attention has been focused too narrowly on the modal response. In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, we have examined the implications of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap. Performance errors are a minor factor in the gap; computational limitations underlie non-normative responding on several tasks, particularly those that involve some type of cognitive decontextualization. Unexpected patterns of covariance can suggest when the wrong norm is being applied to a task or when an alternative construal of the task should be considered appropriate.

The challenge of accounting for individual differences in folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Political Ideologies ◽  
Economic Beliefs ◽  
Existing Data

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.

Individual differences, social attention, and the history of the social motivation hypotheses of autism

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Mundy
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Early Development ◽  
Emotional Development ◽  
Social Motivation ◽  
Social Attention ◽  
Social Emotional Development ◽  
Social Emotional ◽  
Precise Understanding ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of

Abstract The stereotype of people with autism as unresponsive or uninterested in other people was prominent in the 1980s. However, this view of autism has steadily given way to recognition of important individual differences in the social-emotional development of affected people and a more precise understanding of the possible role social motivation has in their early development.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

Inter-individual variation shapes the human microbiome

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily F. Wissel ◽  
Leigh K. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Human Microbiome ◽  
Individual Variability ◽  
Microbiota Composition ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Microbiome Research

Abstract The target article suggests inter-individual variability is a weakness of microbiota-gut-brain (MGB) research, but we discuss why it is actually a strength. We comment on how accounting for individual differences can help researchers systematically understand the observed variance in microbiota composition, interpret null findings, and potentially improve the efficacy of therapeutic treatments in future clinical microbiome research.

Why Speech-Language Clinicians Should Be in the Classroom

1991 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon L. Wadle
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Task Analysis ◽  
Regular Classroom ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
Therapy Room

Lack of training is only an excuse for not collaborating outside of the therapy room. With our present training, speech-language clinicians have many skills to share in the regular classroom setting. This training has provided skills in task analysis, a language focus, an appreciation and awareness of individual differences in learning, and motivational techniques.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document