Heuristics and Biases: Introduction – Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now
By Thomas Gilovich, Dale W. Griffin. 2002
177 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8aa5c6699b384b26c32c03730fcd9f087bd95e84
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
- E. Sadler‐Smith
- Gerd Gigerenzer
- Emily Pronin
- Thomas Gilovich
- Roland Deutsch
- Jonathan Evans
- H. B. Truelove
- Blythe Duell
In General Decision Sciences
- Jonathan Evans
- F. Strack
- E. Sadler‐Smith
- Gerd Gigerenzer
- Roland Deutsch
- Thomas Gilovich
- Emily Pronin
- J. Joireman
In Safety Research
- E. Sadler‐Smith
- Gerd Gigerenzer
- F. Strack
- Jonathan Evans
- J. Joireman
- H. B. Truelove
- Blythe Duell
- Roland Deutsch
Citations in the corpus
- Intuition in Management Research: A Historical Review (2012, unknown): “As Hodgkinson and Healey (in press) have observed: (1) earlier variants of dual-process theory reinforced the cognitive miser notion (cf. Gilovich and Griffin, 2002, p.5); (2) more recent developments suggest that an automatic and affective reflexive or X-system " underpins " the controlled…”
- The Unmet Potential of Interdisciplinary Research: Political Psychological Approaches to Voting and Public Opinion (2009, background): “The two processes are conceived as differing ‘‘categorically…in kind’’ from one another (Gilovich and Griffin 2002, p. 3).”
- Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior (2004, result): “Thus, in contrast to most of the dual-process models previously described, the proposed model is a two-systems model (see also, Gilovich & Griffin, 2002) of social behavior.”
- Homo Heuristicus: Why Biased Minds Make Better Inferences (2009, background): “One-word explanations such as the most recent ‘‘six general purpose heuristics identified (affect, availability, causality, fluency, similarity, and surprise)’’ (Gilovich & Griffin, 2002, p. 17) are not the only surrogates for theories.”
- Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others. (2004, background): “Many analysts, however, have defended either the rationality or the functionality of judgmental tendencies or strategies that other psychologists cite as illustrative of nonnormativeness or suboptimality (see Gigerenzer, 1996; Gilovich & Griffin, 2002).”
- The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation (2006, background): “Such theories have become increasingly popular and are now being applied in the field of judgment and decision making (Gilovich & Griffin, 2002; Hammond, 1966; Kahneman & Frederick, 2002), as well as in the psychology of reasoning (Evans & Over, 1996; Sloman, 1996; Stanovich, 1999, 2004).”
- Unpacking Intuition: A Process and Outcome Framework (2011, background): “…assessments” and “sensible estimation procedures” based on sophisticated underlying processes (e.g., retrieval and matching) in response to fairly simple questions posed under conditions of uncertainty, rather than assessments for complex judgmental problems (Gilovich & Griffin, 2002, p. 3).”
- Effect of outdoor temperature, heat primes and anchoring on belief in global warming (2010, methodology): “The anchoring and adjustment heuristic has been applied to a variety of judgments, including the risk of nuclear war (Plous, 1989) and the expected longevity of a common resource (Joireman, Posey, Truelove, & Parks, 2009) (for reviews, see Chapman & Johnson, 2002; Gilovich & Griffin, 2002).”
- Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. (2011, unknown): “…nearly all reasoning and judgment depends deeply on the framing of the problem or decision and that genuine preferences may not even exist in the abstract but, rather, are constructed relative to particular contexts (Gilovich & Griffin, 2002; Kahneman & Tversky, 1984; Slovic, 1995; Thaler, 1999).”
- Metaphorical images of organization: How organizational researchers develop and select organizational metaphors (2005, background): “Furthermore, such judgments of the value and use of a metaphor rest in the context of organizational theorizing and research, as in the world at large, on a limited number of simplifying heuristics rather than extensive algorithmic processing (Gilovich & Griffin, 2002).”