Why Do People Tend to Infer “Ought” From “Is”? The Role of Biases in Explanation

By Christina M. Tworek, Andrei Cimpian. 2016

67 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. Rebecca J. Schlegel
2. Robert R. Hoffman
3. Joshua A. Hicks
4. Crystal L. Park
5. M. Steger
6. L. King
7. Login S. George
8. E. Sadler‐Smith

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Gary Klein
2. Robert R. Hoffman
3. William J. Clancey
4. Joshua A. Hicks
5. Abigail Emrey
6. Shane T. Mueller
7. David William Aha
8. D. Gunning

In General Decision Sciences

1. Robert R. Hoffman
2. Shane T. Mueller
3. Gary Klein
4. William J. Clancey
5. Joshua A. Hicks
6. Rebecca J. Schlegel
7. Abigail Emrey
8. Ivano Cardinale

Citations in the corpus

• Explanation in Human-AI Systems: A Literature Meta-Review, Synopsis of Key Ideas and Publications, and Bibliography for Explainable AI (2019, methodology): “This research has similarities to the heuristics-and-biases literature in the field of judgment and decision making, insofar as it focuses on the limitations and difficulties of understanding (see Fernbach et al., 2013; Tworek and Cimpian, 2016).”
• Understanding the Relationship Between Perceived Authenticity and Well-Being (2019, background): “There may thus be a basic cognitive tendency to identify “the true” with “the good,” and this could partially explain the value ascribed to true selves (also see work on is–ought inferences by Tworek & Cimpian, 2016).”