Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:16:24.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Independent decisions are fictional from a psychological perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2014

Hans-Rüdiger Pfister  and
Gisela Böhm
Hans-Rüdiger Pfister
Affiliation:
Institute of Experimental Industrial Psychology, Leuphana University Lüneburg, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany. [email protected]/en/hans-ruediger-pfister.html
Gisela Böhm
Affiliation:
Faculty of Psychology, University of Bergen, 5015 Bergen, Norway. [email protected]://www.uib.no/personer/Gisela.Boehm#profil
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Contrasting independent with socially influenced decision making does not capture crucial differences in decision making. Independence is fictional, and social influences substantially permeate preference construction. A distinction between deliberate and intuitive decision making would be more useful, and the problem in the big-data era is deciding when it is better to rely on deliberation and when to trust one's intuitions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 95 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akerlof, G. A. & Shiller, R. (2009) Animal spirits: How human psychology drives the economy, and why it matters for global capitalism. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ariely, D. (2008) Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (2007) Thinking and deciding, 3rd and 4th editions. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Böhm, G. & Pfister, H.-R. (2000) Action tendencies and characteristics of environmental risks. Acta Psychologica 104(3):317–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brehmer, B. (1980) In one word: Not from experience. Acta Psychologica 45:223–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G. & Rabin, M., eds. (2004) Advances in behavioral economics. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Damasio, A. R. (1994) Descartes' error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. Putnam Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008) Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59:255–78.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. (2007) Gut feelings. The intelligence of the unconscious. Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., Czerlinski, J. & Martignon, L. (2002) How good are fast and frugal heuristics? In: Heuristics and biases. The psychology of intuitive judgment, Gilovich, T., Griffin, D. & Kahneman, D., pp. 559–81. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. T. & Wilson, T. D. (2007) Prospection: Experiencing the future. Science 137:1351–54.Google Scholar
Gilovich, T., Griffin, D. & Kahneman, D., eds. (2002) Heuristics and biases. The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardman, D. (2009) Judgment and decision making. Psychological perspectives. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hogarth, R. M. (2010) Intuition: A challenge for psychological research on decision making. Psychological Inquiry 21:338–53. doi: 0.1080/1047840X.2010.520260.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. J. & Goldstein, D. (2003) Do defaults save lives? Science 302:1338–39.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2003) Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review 93:1449–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Penguin.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–91.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A., eds. (2000) Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koehler, D. J. & Harvey, N., eds. (2004) Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S. & Slovic, P., eds. (2006) The construction of preference. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G., ed. (2007) Exotic preferences: Behavioral economics and human motivation. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, G. & Lerner, J. S. (2003) The role of affect in decision making. In: Handbook of affective science, ed. Davidson, R. J., Goldsmith, H. H. & Scherer, K. R., pp. 619–42. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Loftus, E. F. & Pickrell, J. E. (1995) The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals 25:720–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordónez, L. D., Connolly, T. & Coughlan, R. (2000) Multiple reference points in satisfaction and fairness assessment. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 13:329–44.Google Scholar
Pfister, H.-R. & Böhm, G. (2008) The multiplicity of emotions: A framework of emotional functions in decision making. Judgment and Decision Making 3(1):5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfister, H.-R. & Böhm, G. (2012) Responder feelings in a three-player three-option ultimatum game: Affective determinants of rejection behavior. Games 3(1):1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R. (2008) Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin Group.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. & Simonson, I. (1993) Context-dependent preferences. Management Science 39:1179–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Thaler, R. H. (1990) Anomalies: Preference reversals. Journal of Economic Perspectives 4:201–11.Google Scholar
Zeelenberg, M. & Pieters, R. (2006) Feeling is for doing: A pragmatic approach to the study of emotions in economic behavior. In: Social psychology and economics, ed. DeCremer, D., Zeelenberg, M. & Murnighan, J. K., pp. 117–37. Erlbaum.Google Scholar