Theories of truth as assessment criteria in judgment and decision making

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 116-125

  Dunwoody, Philip T ^a  

^a JUNIATA COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Brunswik(ian); Coherence; Correspondence; Fast and frugal; Functionalism; Heuristics and biases; Judgment and decision making; Pragmatism; Representative design

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350180156     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (49)

1. Adam, M. B., & Reyna, V. F. (2005). Coherence and correspondence criteria for rationality: Experts' estimation of risks of sexually transmitted infections. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 169-186.
2. Bar-Hillel, M. (1980). The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. Acta Psychologica, 44, 211-233.
3. Baron, J. (2004). Normative models of judgment and decision making. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 19-36). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
4. Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and deciding (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Beckstead, J. W., & Stamp, K. D. (2007). Understanding how nurse practitioners estimate patient's risk for coronary heart disease: a judgment analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(4), 436-446.
6. Brunswik, E. (1937/2001). Psychology as a science of objective relations. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 38-54). New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Brunswik, E. (1944/2001). Distal focusing of perception: Size constancy in a representative sample of situations. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 68-105). New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Brunswik, E. (1956/2001), Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 260-264). New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Brunswik, E. (1957/2001), Scope and aspects of the cognitive problem. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 300-312). New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Cooksey, R. W. (1996). Judgment analysis: Theory, methods, and applications. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
11. Dawson, N. V., & Gregory, F. (2009). Correspondence and coherence in science: A brief historical perspective. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 126-133.
12. Dhami, M. K., Hertwig, R., & Hoffrage, U. (2004). The role of representative design in an ecological approach to cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 130 (6), 959- 988.
13. Doherty, M., & Kurz, E. M. (1996). Social judgment theory. Thinking and Reasoning, 2 (2/3), 109-140.
14. Dunwoody, P. T. (2006/2007). The neglect of the environment by cognitive psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 26, 139-153.
15. Dunwoody, P. T., Goodie, A. S., & Mahan, R. P. (2005). The use of base rate information as a function of experienced consistency. Theory and Decision, 59, 307- 344.
16. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704.
17. Gigerenzer, G., & Kurz, E. M. (2001). Vicarious functioning reconsidered: A fast and frugal lens model. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 342-347). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
18. Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999). The research agenda. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 1-36). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
19. Goldstein, W. M., & Hogarth, R. M. (1997). Judgment and decision research. In W. M. Goldstein & R. M. Hogarth (Eds.), Research on Judgment and Decision Making: Currents, connections, and Controversies (pp. 3-68). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
20. Goodie, A. S., & Fantino, E. (1995). An experientially derived base-rate error in humans. Psychological Science, 6(2), 101-106.
21. Goodie, A. S., & Fantino, E. (1996). Learning to commit or avoid the base-rate error, Nature 380, 247-249.
22. Goodie, A. S., & Fantino, E. (1999a). Base rates versus sample accuracy: Competition for control in human matching to sample. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71(2), 155-169.
23. Goodie, A. S., & Fantino, E. (1999b). What does and does not alleviate base-rate neglect under direct experience. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 307-335.
24. Hammond, K. R. (1996). Human judgment and social policy: Irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavailable injustice. New York: Oxford University Press.
25. Hammond, K. R. (2007). Beyond rationality: The search for wisdom in a troubled time. New York: Oxford University Press.
26. Hammond, K. R. (2008, November 14). Reconciliation of opposing conclusions regarding rationality. Paper presented at the 24th Annual International Meeting of the Brunswik society.
27. Hammond, K. R., & Stewart, T. R. (Eds.). (2001), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
28. Hammond, K. R., & Summers, D. A. (1965). Cognitive dependence on linear and nonliear cues. Psychological Review, 72, 215-224.
29. Hammond, K. R., & Summers, D. A. (1972). Cognitive control. Psychological Review, 79, 58-67.
30. Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81-91.
31. Haselton, M. G., & Nettle, D. (2006). The paranoid optimist: An integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10 (1) 47-66.
32. Holzworth, R. J. (2001). Multiple cue probability learning. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 348-350). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
33. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.
35. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80 (4), 237-251.
36. Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2009). Coherence and correspondence in engineering design: Informing the conversation and meeting with JDM research. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 147-153.
37. Kirkham, R. L. (1992). Theories of truth: A critical introduction. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
38. Koehler, J. J. (1996). The base rate fallacy reconsidered: Descriptive, normative, and methodological challenges. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 19, 1-53.
39. Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
40. Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 306-334). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Mosier, K. L. (2009). Searching for coherence in a correspondence world. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 154-163.
41. Neace, W. P., Michaud, S., Bolling, L., Deer, K., & Zecevic, L. (2008), Frequency formats, probability formats, or problem structure? A test of the nested-sets hypothesis in an extensional reasoning task. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 140-152.
42. Schmitt, F. F. (2004). Truth: An introduction. In F. F. Schmitt (Ed.), Theories of truth (pp. 1-38). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
43. Tape, T. G. (2009), Correspondence and coherence in medicine. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 130- 140.
44. Tetlock, P. E. (1997). An alternative metaphor in the study of judgment and choice: People as politicians. In W. M. Goldstein & R. M. Hogarth (Eds.), Research on Judgment and Decision Making: Currents, connections, and Controversies (pp. 657-680). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
45. Tolman, E. C., & Brunswik, E. (1935/2001). The organism and the causal texture of the environment. In K. R. Hammond & T. R. Stewart (Eds.), The essential Brunswik: Beginnings, explications, applications (pp. 17-34). New York: Oxford University Press.
46. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 3-22). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. Velasquez, M. (2005). Philosophy (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
48. Weiss, D. J., Brennan, K., Thomas, R., Kirlik, A., & Miller, S. (2009). Criteria for performance evaluation. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 164-174.
49. Ziman, J. (1984). An introduction to science studies: The philosophical and social aspects of science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.