Gigerenzer's 'external validity argument' against the heuristics and biases program: an assessment [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Mind and Society 11 (2):133-148 (2012)
|Abstract||Gigerenzer’s ‘external validity argument’ plays a pivotal role in his critique of the heuristics and biases research program (HB). The basic idea is that (a) the experimental contexts deployed by HB are not representative of the real environment and that (b) the differences between the setting and the real environment are causally relevant, because they result in different performances by the subjects. However, by considering Gigerenzer’s work on frequencies in probability judgments, this essay attempts to show that there are fatal flaws in the argument. Specifically, each of the claims is controversial: whereas (b) is not adequately empirically justified, (a) is inconsistent with the ‘debiasing’ program of Gigerenzer’s ABC group. Therefore, whatever reason we might have for believing that the experimental findings of HB lack experimental validity, this should not be based on Gigerenzer’s version of the argument.|
|Keywords||Heuristics and biases Judgemental biases External validity Probabilistic thinking Frequentistic thinking Debiasing Field experiments|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Yuichi Amitani (2008). The Frequency Hypothesis and Evolutionary Arguments. Kagaku Tetsugaku 41 (1):79-94.
Benjamin E. Hilbig & Tobias Richter (2011). Homo Heuristicus Outnumbered: Comment on Gigerenzer and Brighton (2009). Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (1):187-196.
Michael E. Gorman (2000). Heuristics in Technoscientific Thinking. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):752-752.
Nick Chater (2000). How Smart Can Simple Heuristics Be? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):745-746.
William C. Wimsatt (2000). Heuristics Refound. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):766-767.
Luis M. Miller (2010). Why a Trade-Off? The Relationship Between the External and Internal Validity of Experiments. Theoria 25 (3):301-321.
David C. Funder (2000). Gone with the Wind: Individual Differences in Heuristics and Biases Undermine the Implication of Systematic Irrationality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):673-674.
Ralph Hertwig & Annika Wallin (2004). Out of the Theoretical Cul-de-Sac. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):342-343.
Carole J. Lee (2007). The Representation of Judgment Heuristics and the Generality Problem. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society:1211-6.
Peter M. Todd & Gerd Gigerenzer (2000). Précis of Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):727-741.
Thomas Sturm (2008). What Is the Foundation of Norms of Rationality? In Ansgar Beckermann, Holm Tetens & Sven Walter (eds.), Philosophie: Grundlagen und Anwendungen/Philosophy: Foundations and Applications. Mentis.
Arthur Schram (2005). Artificiality: The Tension Between Internal and External Validity in Economic Experiments. Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2):225-237.
Aidan Feeney (2000). Simple Heuristics: From One Infinite Regress to Another? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):749-750.
Dr Tim Rakow, Neal Hinvest, Edward Jackson & Martin Palmer (2004). Simple Heuristics From the Adaptive Toolbox: Can We Perform the Requisite Learning? Thinking and Reasoning 10 (1):1 – 29.
Added to index2012-02-17
Total downloads13 ( #95,599 of 739,344 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,344 )
How can I increase my downloads?